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.
Are we playing Spot That Fallacy!!?
Misleading vividness – involves describing an occurrence in vivid detail, even if it is an exceptional occurrence, to convince someone that it is a problem.
Red herring – a speaker attempts to distract an audience by deviating from the topic at hand by introducing a separate argument which the speaker believes will be easier to speak to.
-> Appeal to emotion – where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning[49]
-> -> Appeal to pity (argumentum ad misericordiam) – an argument attempts to induce pity to sway opponents
Congratulations! You’ve managed to score the elusive triple layer fallacy!! (The only person here who supports the prison industry complex is Ruby btw, and you might’ve seen the shit we give her for that? Yeah, do explain how feminism is the cause of any of those)
@Anathema – feminists keep saying they are all for men too, but
1) the clue is in the name – if they were it would be called humanism or egalitarianism
2) the actions of most feminists disprove this claim at pretty much every opportunity
And so sorry to burst your bubble, but the situations in which men are worse off than women are not “few and far between” they are systemic. I’ve already given you a list of just some of the instances (see my post to Cliff) I recommend you go and look up the actual data.
@Cliff Pervocracy
“And how many of those have fuck-all to do with feminism?”
All of them.
Hi, The First Joe, It would appear you’re a new comments troll, please, come, stay a while and enjoy the scenery. Also we ran out of trolls to mock just as I was starting to get good at this so we need fresh material.
lol this gibberish again
2)
Like when they make fun of me for saying stupid things! This proves that feminists are against rather than for men as a group.
So why is men’s rights called men’s rights again? Shouldnt it be called “equalityisticism” or something?
@Argenti – ignoring the garbage that makes up most of your post.
I took Ruby to task for her apex fallacy. Clearly you too suffer from this delusion, I have directed you to the categories where you should look at the actual statistical data which proves my point. Your failure to do so, is not my problem.
Apparently you also labour under the delusion that I’m claiming feminism caused all these systemic issues – No. Apart from education which it clearly did, health/welfare it had a strong influence, and suicide where there is a strong correlation, feminism per se (as opposed to much older, related, but not identical societal gynocentrism) is not the key causal factor.
Tell us again how wars are caused by the wimmenz,
UsulOwly.No, tell us how male suicide is strongly correlated with feminism. We await with baited breath.
this isnt a real thing, dummy
Actually, Owly, tell us how you manage to be under the illusion that “fuck-all to do with” means “is caused by”. Note that this is a use of English problem, not a whether or not feminism causes things problem.
Now here is something to take note of…. owly finally got something right!!! All of those things that were listed have fuck-all to do with feminism.
damn! ninja’d by CassandraSays
I want the link between feminism and homelessness.
@CassandraSays
“No, tell us how male suicide is strongly correlated with feminism. We await with baited breath.”
http://rebukingfeminism.blogspot.com/2009/03/male-suicide-rates-on-epidemic-climb.html
Every counrty without fail that has adopted the poison of feminism into it’s culture shows the identical pattern. Fun for the whole family. Just go to any country and use mens rise in suicide rate to determine when feminism was shoved down their throats. Well done ladies! Well done! It must be what women want.
@Futrelle – Hah! Good point
Answers:
– Those names were already taken.
– The majority of men were utterly asleep as to how fucking badly they were being screwed under the old system, carrots like Marriage 1.0 and default paternal custody of kids (yeah, I’m going back a long way here) made men feel invested in their societies.
After decades of feminism took away all the carrots and left only the sticks (at the same time as the globalist hierarchy fucked men in other ways) men were forced awake, most often by losing their kids, getting horribly screwed in divorce, losing job(s) unjustly (affirmative action for women), getting slung in jail for being poor (euphemised as “contempt of court order to pay”) – things that feminists have been very prominent in doing / enabling / encouraging / lobbying (the bleating of manboobzers notwithstanding). So naturally, the movemnt got intially framed as feminisms mirror image. Actually a mistake I feel, up to a point, because men in general get badly fucked by the hierarchy of Assholes In Charge to whom feminism is just one tool in the kit… but:
– I don’t know, I didn’t name it. :p
Really, Joe? “equalityisticism” was taken?
Feminism is aimed at making sure that men and women have equal rights. As a whole, society gives men more rights than women and values men over women. So while men are also hurt by the way our society views gender, women are hurt more. That means that women’s rights are a primary focus of any attempt to make gender equality a reality. That’s why it’s called feminism.
If you don’t like the name or you think it’s misleading, fine. But that does not make it okay for you to redefine the word “feminism” to match your preconceived expectations.
Humanism and egalitarianism don’t work to specifically describe attempts to achieve gender equality because those words already have meanings. Humanism already refers to a range of philosophies which share a focus on human values, interests, and welfare. Egalitarianism refers to the idea that all human beings are of equal worth and should be treated as such. Unlike feminism, neither of these words focus on equality between the genders.
I am a humanist and an egalitarian. But I still call myself a feminist. My feminism is a natural outgrowth of my humanism and egalitarianism.
I’m not going to deny that there are a few feminists who take things to far. There are a few people who call themselves feminists who are anti-men. But this is not the majority of feminists! Most feminists would find those attitudes repugnant. Most feminists want to see both men and women treated fairly.
I smell a new faux blog coming… 🙂
“Feminism” isn’t named “humanism” for the same reason that the North Carolina Animal Welfare Association isn’t named the “All Good Things For Everyone Everywhere Association.”
We’re allowed to specialize. It is not unethical for us not to take up every cause ever.
And before that he was whining about how feminists were secretly anti-male because gathered under the label of “feminism” instead of “humanism” or “egalitarianism”. You know, labels that actually were already taken.
Yeah, Joe, since the names you suggested were already taken, what would you have liked feminism to call itself?
Unless it’s that you just don’t think that a movement designed to secure rights for women should exist at all.
Is First Joe another one with his nose out of joint because he can’t be boss feminist, or is this new whining of his?
Joe, please tell us how it is like you did with the whole trans issue. Better yet, just shut the fuck up in general.
So is tomato sauce Super Mega Misandry?
I am NOT taking on equalityisticism. I already have one half-assed spinoff blog. lol.
I like how all feminists are evil because FEMININE, but MRAs just couldn’t choose a word that already existed, and how every single manboobzer is personally responsible for feminism even though Joe had nothing to do with naming the MRM.