Over on AskReddit, someone called 478nist has asked a question that has been puzzling a lot of us for some time: “Why is Reddit so anti-women? (outside of r/gonewild anyway).”
I used to think it was just because the large majority of users are men, but it’s not pro-men it’s becoming more and more anti-women.
Outside of the friendzoned crap, any comment that leans towards any kind of talk of womens issues, equal rights etc gets downvoted to hell so it’s not even capable of being discussed. It seems like it’s an US vs THEM mentality more and more. Was it always like this?
The thread that followed is nearly 2000 comments long, so far, and has gotten written up on TheAtlanticWire. The discussion is surprisingly … good? Not perfect — after all, this is Reddit we’re talking about here — but not terrible.
So naturally our friends in the Men’s Rights subreddit are complaining about it.
The legendary AnthonyZarat offers this thought:
MauraLoona, meanwhile, challenges the premise of 478nist’s question, and thereby challenges reality itself:
Legitimateusername also has a problem with Reddit’s alleged surplus of manginas.
Fuckrpolitics_again just goes with some plain old-fashioned misogyny:
The Men’s Rights subreddit, such a reliable generator of self-righteous poop.
Hah! It seems that some of the Boobzers are feeling a bit incredulous that I am in a relationship. I know that Boobzland would like to believe that only cringing male feminist toadies can get a significant other; that’s not how it works. Remember, most women aren’t vile, disgusting misandrist-feminists with double standards out the wazoo.
I don’t see why it’s hard to believe. I am semi-intelligent, semi-attractive twentysomething with a good job. I’m not exceptional. But I don’t see why it’s any sort of stretch to believe I am dating another semi-intelligent, semi-attractive twentysomething with a good job.
oh god hes on a roll today
And by the way, I did read that forum post you’re currently obsessing about. I’m not surprised that “Maybe it’s not so unreasonable for someone who earns more and has fewer expenses to kick in a bit more for dinner.” transformed into “FEMINISTS DEMAND MEN SUBSIDIZE THEIR FOOD ARGLEBARGLE VILE MISANDRY!” after passing through your brain, what with you being a giant baby and all.
mikey why do you think writing shit like that makes you look better?
Ah yes, we should take everything Mikey says as absolute truth and never doubt a word he says despite the fact that he’s an admitted liar, but when he ignores the many women who have mentioned how difficult it can be to get a guy who is determined to pay for their dinner to let them go dutch, that’s just because we’re all vile misandrists. I mean, clearly women’s experiences with dating men aren’t to be taken seriously, but we should take Mikey seriously because of his extensive experience dating men. Or something.
Steel, exactly how is paying for what? One meal a week subsidizing a womans food intake? Do you also stop by the nearest grocery store and pick up her groceries too?
Us feminists need more than one meal a week to maintain our fat hairyiness, though it might explain the bad temper.
I love how the exact phrase Varople is so pissy about is “Then again, with unequal wages sometimes I feel like maybe he should kick in a little more. But in my perfect world we’d have equal money and spend equal money.”
So, if two people make the same amount of money, they will share costs equally.
Or was it “Yeah, this is why I have nothing bad to say, in a vacuum, about a woman who allows men to pay for her dates.” YES ALLOWING MEN TO SPEND MONEY HOW THEY WANT TO IS MISANDRY.
Also, I love how even Varpole claims to be in a relationship that goes Dutch. See how easy it is? Men who have a problem with paying for their dates just say so, and bam! they don’t pay. Noone is forcing them.
of course, when we believe things david says that turns out to be true, that’s a sign of our low intelligence because um… VILE SCUMBAGS!!!!!!!
To be fair, when I was dating, I would often go out to dinner with women. They might order a salad and a reasonably priced entree, and I would order five steaks stuffed with lobster and wrapped in gold leaf.
Then, when they refused to split the bill 50/50 with me, I would jump up on the table and scream at them about how vile and misandrist they were for insisting I subsidize the intake of food substances into their face tubes.
Mike sounds like quite the charmer. “Baby, you are looking very semi-attractive tonight. But what I really love about you is your semi-intelligent personality.”
“On two occasions, I walked out of a date due to the woman insisting upon me paying for her livelihood – unsurprisingly, both were feminists.”
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight….
Too bad Mikey’s not even semi-intelligent.
Too be fair, if there is an Ella, the fact that she’s staying with a businessman/grad student who spends 20 hours a week calling people vile on the internet for mocking hate sites doesn’t speak too well for her either. I would probably agree with Mike’s assessment of her personality.
Steele: “you feminists all want men to pay for your dinner on dates! This is the worst thing ever!”
Manboobz: “no we don’t and no it’s not”
Steele: “SEE!!! You ADMIT it!”
Well, either that or really low self-esteem.
Or she’s dating him to shut up a nagging matchmaker, and the fact that he spends 20 hours a week calling people ‘vile’ on the internet is a plus.
I struggle to eat enough as I don’t like food much. As such I subsidise my food intake with weight maintaining shakes. I pay for them myself. I know it isn’t healthy but is it misandary?
…I googled this on a hunch and I’m not going to link it here, but there is a line of sex dolls called ‘Ella’. In fairness, there are probably dozens of lines of sex dolls with all sorts of women’s names. I’m just sayin’.
Yo, if I could make a couple thousand more a year, I would be just fine with plunking down $40 for a nice dinner every now and then.
…You realize that women still have to buy groceries, right? No one’s actually living on the food they get from dates. It’s seriously not that much money and not that much food in the grand scheme of things. And income inequality is that much money.
(I alternate paying with my boyfriend, even though he makes twice what I do, just because it’s not that much money and I’d feel weird having him pay for me. But I completely sympathize with women in my position who are like actually, nope, you can use part of that twenty thousand extra dollars and pay my $20 tab.)
aworldanonymous — “@Argenti I was thinking of taking Latin if I have any room for it in second year, is it worth the trouble?”
Ehh, maybe? I can’t give you a good answer here as my Latin teacher wasn’t worth the trouble. On the other hand, mocking trolls who try turning legal/medicine/math Latin into some weird English thing really is quite fun. And I’ll give it this, I learned more English in Latin class than in English class.
THIS LOOKS FAKED
I CAN TELL FROM SOME OF THE BREADSTICKS, AND FROM HAVING SEEN MANY DATES IN MY TIME
Hey, does anybody here want to swap a Men Die In Wars for these three Title IX Creates Quotas, mint-condition, bagged and boarded, and one Weight Bearing Buttock Pads, slightly foxed?
Technically a subsidy is granted by a government, usually to promote enterprise. So how exactly is a lone guy on a date subsidizing anything? A gift of money to encourage enterprise would be giving someone an investment to open a restaurant, not buying someone a meal.
Also I’d love for Steele to explain the guy who broke up with me when I insisted on alternating paying for dates. I refused to be subsidized! But I’m a feminist! Maybe like bisexual unicorn English majors, I don’t really exist?
I can’t tell if Steele is using quote marks around words that aren’t actually quotes because he thinks it’s effective for emphasis or as part of his ham-fisted attempts at deception.
It’s like everything he types forces me to play a quick game of “Shitty writer or shitty liar?” and somehow the answer is always “both.”
Cliff – The wage gap doesn’t exist, but even if it did – that doesn’t say anything at all about any two individuals on a date, especially if they’re younger. Gender is only one variable among many, and it seems to me that we’d best not make sweeping idiot-proclamations that are demonstratably often wrong. Demanding that men pay based on nothing more than gender is classic M-feminist “bullshit” based on M-feminist garbage-reasoning. If you were talking about the higher-earning partner paying, that would be less vile, though I’d still disagree.
Because here’s another thing: It’s not for the person being treated to dictate whether or not they get treated. No matter the income disparity between two individuals, or any other difference, it is up to each to decide if they will kindly offer to pay for the other. If any woman- or any man- had this attitude:
But I completely sympathize with women in my position who are like actually, nope, you can use part of that twenty thousand extra dollars and pay my $20 tab.)
… well, they can take a hike with that enormous entitlement complex. I mean, that’s just rude. As I’ve said, I have had two dates with similar attitudes – and I walked right out, after paying for my own share and not a cent more.
And of course, it’s exponentially worse with misandrist-feminists because you have literally made a hobby out of both promoting misandry and whining about every little double standard and instance of alleged “misogyny”… but then you turn right around and demand that men subsidize you, based on nothing more than gender. Misandrist-feminism: Equality, unless it suits women.
Rank hypocrisy, as always. Disgusting. Jester’s fool to the world.
Also, since you have a “boyfriend”, I’m taking a leap and assuming that you’re under, say, 35. In which case, there is in fact a reverse gender gap. You should be paying, by your vile “logic”.
“Rank hypocrisy, as always. Disgusting. Jester’s fool to the world.”
Dude, you really need to stop talking about yourself.