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.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/danny-dyer-how-to-be-a-man/on-demand/74529-001

(Tried to post this in another pansy ass sub which is supposedly for men and it was removed because apparently anything mentioning feminism is out of bounds)

What’s with this?

There are a lot of men’s issues which are caused by things other than “Patriarchy”.

Men receiving less focus, funding and encouragement via focused advertising in higher education (for instance all the ads for Universities in my area feature female students in the foreground and female voice overs) for the past 3 decades, and this continuing and worsening once they’ve become a minority in higher education, isn’t the fault of “the patriarchy”. That’s why when society was truly male dominated in terms of education and industry, it never happened, and why it has only happened in the past half century.

Women’s groups pushing child custody laws throughout history (first the tender years doctrine of mother being best, then the idea the child should stay with the primary caregiver more pre divorce as being best) which favour always seem to favour women getting more custody is not the result of the patriarchy.

Anyone else find this a lame cop out to insist that everything bad must be caused by patriarchy and women’s groups or feminism can’t possibly influence society in negative ways for men?

In my opinion, if anything, feminism weaponises so called patriarchal thinking in their favour when they use this argument, as what they’re doing is putting a greater responsibility for moral outcomes on men as a group and emphasising their weakness and lack of ability to effect social change. But given it’s seemingly done to deflect blame for everything to men, while simultaneously continuing to push advance the problems men face in specific areas (ie education) it can’t really be called patriarchy.

It’s not one for one with human since the gender differences in this species make it necessary, but in Elephant society only females stay in the herd and raise the young - they are filling a stereotypical female mammalian role of the sort feminists would call patriarchal in humans - yet we call Elephant society a matriarchy. Why is anything stereotypically associated with feminine roles in humans said to be a result of Patriarchy, when we have no idea if women were actually thrust into that role or took it, and now continue to take it (pushing for greater advocation for themselves to receive child custody over men) in a more modern way?

If two adults (Men and women) married or not if have consent they will engage in sexual activities.

To avoid unwanted pregnancies they both have to use barriers / protection and it can be basically condoms and pills .

Then why women blame it always on men when they get pregnant ?

They will say things like " If men wanted to sleep around then they should have used protection or vasectomy "

My question is ain't women are the gate keepers of sex ? They are the one who decides whome to ejaculate in them .

Another, where was her protection ? Where was her condom ? They even say contraception isn't always effective. Then women should not sleep around then ? Because condoms can be break and vasectomy ? For women's solace ? What about if women sleeping around frequently then why don't they have their TUBES TIED when they are the one letting so many men hit them .

They use the same argument on child support debate.

And forget about the women baby trapping men

Is there any article about women lies 🤔 about birth control ?

My older cousin got married in November 2022. Within the first week, his wife started arguing and causing trouble with her husband and in-laws. We found out she has mental health issues and is getting treatment in Delhi. They started living apart afterward.

Now, she is bothering everyone in the family. She forced her way into my house twice in Bangalore, locked herself in a room, and caused a disturbance. By the time the police arrived, she left. When we tried to file a complaint, the police blamed us for letting her in and didn't take our complaint.

At times, she says she wants a baby with my cousin. Other times, she sends photos of a man she claims she will marry. She also demanded one crore and threatened to file a fake case involving everyone. We have proof of everything.

We have already filed a case against her. Recently, she went to her in-laws' house, sat in front of the gate, and started shouting and causing trouble. The police took her in for counseling, understanding her mental health issues.Her main goal seems to be harassing us in every possible way. This week, she filed a dowry harassment case against us. How should we handle this situation? Our family is under a lot of stress.

https://medium.com/illumination/american-men-are-unbearable-lazy-slobs-801cce55325f

I keep seeing this insinuation that men don't have guy friends they can talk to. I acknowledge this is unfortunately true for some, but it has not been always been true for me, and it may not have always been true for them either. In the past, I've been able to be "real" with plenty of my guy friends. They listened, and they seemed to understand. And yet not a single person could help me. But I do remember them helping each other out. Meet this girl, come work here with me, they'd say to each other. Maybe they weren't really my friends. I don't know.

Sometimes it unintentionally makes you feel more alone in your problem. You open up to your friends from high school or college about how you're struggling, people the same age or same part of life as you, and they can't help you and you can't help them because both of you have the same struggles and have no idea on how to fucking solve them. And then our "sink or swim" society forces you to go your separate ways, moving entire states or countries away, and some people get lucky and others don't. Lots of men don't feel better from simply talking about a problem with another person. Lots of men won't feel better until they know what they need to fucking do to GET. THE. RESULTS. that they want. They need a path with guidance from someone who cares. Not cooperative rumination that will only ever leave them right where they fucking started before the conversation.

Or, even "better" is when people you've known for years pass you by and are 3-5x more successful than you in practically every area of life and still cannot help you. Now sure, at the age of 25 I don't expect my buddy from high school to teach me how to skate so I can become an NHL player like he is. But the point is: the people who have the results that you want, they have financial security, they have a romantic partner, they have the work-life balance, somehow can't help you. Are they *obligated* to help you or anybody else? No. I'm simply stating the fact. Then they suddenly have a family or seriously begin readying for one, they move up in the corporate world, they move away. "Stay in touch" is bullshit; their new circle becomes people who are only as relatively successful as them, and they're now in a totally different world than you that you can only be a part of for as long as you insist on imposing yourself into it. You're not really invited.

Then you feel really isolated, because now you've been left behind. So in my experience it isn't that men can't be real with each other. Maybe I was lucky or something, but I had lots of guy friends who I could talk to and they would listen, even if they weren't necessarily the best at it. People just don't know how to help other people. And it is preposterous to expect "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" to be a reliable method of improvement for people who haven't the faintest clue of what the fuck went wrong in their life or what to even begin doing about it.

People lack real-life mentors. People on the internet, and social media influencers, are very poor substitutes. All they can give you is words. Sorry for the rant. I guess I'm doing the very thing I am complaining about.

Some points that come to mind are:

• Women hold many positions in the paid military: why are they suddenly considered not useful as conscripts? Even if one argues they might not be the most suitable in some positions, there are many other jobs that would be suitable for women either with training or because of existing military or non-military training/professional qualifications. Also some women in modern society are already physically fit while many men are the opposite. Having some female conscripts could also free up men from some positions to do other types of work in the military if it was considered only men were suitable for some positions.
• An argument often made is that children need their mothers. But this ignores the fact that, particularly in modern society, not all women are mothers. Even if one accepts the argument that children need mothers, many women are not mothers. Fathers can also be useful for children. Why should fathers be conscripted before women who aren’t parents?
• Not all women are fertile. It is sometimes argued that society needs women to reproduce. But not all women are fertile and many others have low fertility levels. One obvious group are women aged 45 plus (men up to age 60 are conscripted in Ukraine) (and children born to women over 45 have a much higher rate of birth defects compared to children born to younger women).
• What sort of men might be left after a war? One group will be the men who weren’t conscripted because they were disabled or have health problems, probably not the best gene pool to build a society on. Also they may not be ideal as fathers as they may not be as economically productive as the healthier men who were conscripted. Saving some of the healthy men and allowing instead some of the women to die would seem to be better in terms of the gene pool.
• The argument that one man can reproduce with lots of women so fewer men is not a problem seems very questionable in modern society. We don’t have polygamy and that’s unlikely to change. It’s also not the best for the children if one man is the father to lots of different family units. Having a big gender imbalance is likely going to mean lots of the women never have children.

Other points may occur to others.

A general point: if conscripting women started to happen, there might be more of a reluctance to start wars; tactics might be changed to reduce casualties; conscription itself might be used less; etc.

With all the talk about gender equality in society, the default should be both sexes should be treated equally. There should need to be very strong reasons why one sex gets conscripted and the other doesn’t. The logic for doing it in modern society seems questionable.

What criteria do feminists highlight to claim that cis women are oppressed? Just from what they say these are just stereotypes. The right to vote, the right to an abortion, the right to do business are available in most countries of the world, with the exception of some Islamic countries.

At the same time, using the example of the forced mobilization of men in Russia and Ukraine and the restoration of conscription in many European countries, we see that men are less deserving of the right to life and safety. Nothing has changed since the Titanic. What could be more important than the right to life? This is the criterion that needs to be stated in gender debates!

I am huge into mens rights and it is normal for me to watch feminists across various platforms to form a better opinion about prevalent gender issues. Be it a TV debate, YouTube debate or any other social media,I have come to see a uniform sentiment of 'talking down upon men and their achievements = empowering'

One of the biggest examples being contemporary feminist comedians and authors,their skits/books often revolve around dehumanising men, body shaming men and discrediting all our historical achievements. Now it can be argued that 'it is a joke' but jokes on similar lines targeting women are often tagged as 'sexist' (sweet old male privilege I see).

What about misandrist authors,are we supposed to take their supposedly non-fiction writings as a 'joke' too?

Talking down upon men has been soo normalised that we don't even realise it at times,i therefore request all my fellow men right advocates to speak against it whenever you get the chance to,correct that femcel who tries to discredit our achievements and contribution to the society.

It's just an idea that's been floating around in my head for a while but I was wondering what men actually thought of this... I live in NZ & and wasn't born with a sausage so I could be wrong. However, I've felt generally (likely many women would hate the existence of this just like YMCA) men should have a place, a bar, of activity center, or something, where they can get away from women and/or the world for a break. Women have places like this, or at least most women do- where only women are allowed so it's only fair... It's not healthy to have no space to breathe or no way to get away from abuse or oppression or the modern world, a space to breathe and chill with other men, silently or for conversation. I could think of multiple groups or places I can go if I wanted space from men in general- not that I do but it's there. If anything, I need space from karens at shopping centers. Some people may be infuriated by this but if I have funds I think I'd start something like this and fight other women to keep it alive because maybe I'd have more of a chance to fight legal claims? I feel like the original idea of the YMCA could have been kept or subdivided so that even as a smaller center, it still could of offered a similar place for men or a modernised version... perhaps a camp for men or just something? I've never heard anyone mention something like this and I'm sure many believe it isn't required? "Men are strong right and aren't oppressed by women", so I've been told by many women. However, my general observations have shown that isn't necessarily the case. Women tend to not hit as hard but for longer and more often. Maybe I'll finally get banned from reddit for such heresy...

It’s like they imply women are children who need to be cared for as adults by their parents

Whenever a man is victimized nobody says this

But they’re a woman people are like this is someone’s daughter or mother or if that was my daughter I’d be arrested

You could do something to a guy and nobody says that unless he’s a prepubescent boy

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wgY8Fbg_jNq7Bf2K5PmlaTBrvBVEeyVgN4t6pJnKsm4/edit?usp=sharing

This document is my work in progress to provide best practice guidelines for the New Zealand Human Rights Commission (HRC). The commission is a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI).

I have mental health issues and am struggling to continue to work on it so I am making it available.

It is a mess of draft writing, notes and references documents.

There are a lot of refences, citation and quotes ( u/TheTinMenBlog you may find these interesting).

Even in the realms of intercultural wars men are primary target.

A propaganda on India men , pajeets

In the realms of hard conflict it gets even worse.

Israel deploys AI to generate potential hamas targets, with only human filter in loop to ensured the generated target is male. Project Lavender

One would at least expect women of home faction would be loyal but no.

Indo Europeans mediated genocide on native huntergatheres. Every man in Spain was wiped out 4500 years ago. Women simply married the murders of their sons, husbands and fathers .

Ukrainian women leaving their husbands. How war is destroying marriages

Given historical condition of man is it even any surprise that men evolved certain cultural and psychological traits that vast majority of society (elite men and all women) considers as toxic masculinity.

If you are in a relationship and your girlfriend or wife says she hates men, believe her. If she says that you‘re different, it‘s just because she finds you physically attractive. Once the physical attraction wears off, the realization will set in that you too are a member of the male population that she hates so much. Even if you give your full effort to try to prove that not all men are horrible, you will still spend the entire relationship walking on eggshells trying to remain her archetype of “perfect masculinity”. Once you slip up or disappoint her in any way, she will begin projecting her prejudiced beliefs about men onto you, and you will feed into her “I hate men” rhetoric with every slight mistake you make. I wanted so badly to empathize with these women, because I too didn’t trust men (including myself) for a long time due to the traumas I faced in my youth. However, surrounding myself with this rhetoric time and time again just led me to hate myself even more relive all of the trauma from my past. If you are in a relationship with a woman, and she talks about how much she hates men all the time, it is not real love. Real love is mutual respect and understanding.

“In the Internet Age, users posting on manosphere internet forums such as 4chan and subreddits addressing men's rights activism have claimed that misandry is widespread, established in preferential treatment of women, and shown by discrimination against men. 31141 This viewpoint is denied by most sociologists, anthropologists and scholars of gender studies, who counter that misandry is not a cultural institution, nor equivalent in scope to misogyny, which is far more deeply rooted in society, and more severe in its consequences.”

Just goes to show how misandry isn’t taken seriously enough and is basically no where near as important as feminism.

The title is clear on the point I'm trying to express. This is something I've noticed online in the past year. I can care less what people say or do at all, but we need common concrete definitions for the words that we use to express ourselves to others. Obviously people are going to interpret and use phrases and words slightly different for a number of reasons.

However the issue here is that we are putting a categorical label on people we disagree with that complete negates the original meaning of the word. "Incel" is a word that has two parts; first "involuntary", the next part is "celibate". Those two words have distinct meanings.

First "involuntary" means without choice. Next "celibate" means abstaining from sexual intercourse or marriage. Women are using as a slur due to the fact that they finally have a word that stings.

[This was removed from opinions something sub due to it being quote "Men rights/M**W related] Anything that is about men is basically removed from reddit nowadays, it's sick. Anyways.

Have you all noticed this happening or am I tripping?