Men’s Rights Redditor: Watch out ladies, or we’ll make Friend Zoning illegal!

@Kittehserf Yes we certainly can drop that meme. My apologies.

So… This guy created a whiny thread on r/MensRightsMeta where he says “A lot of really degenerate people seem to have taken an issue with” his comment and expects everyone to agree with him. He is not popular with the “meta” crowd, though it is clear that most of the downvotes came from sources other than r/mr. As “PersianMale” puts it, “This was at +62 before the downvote brigade came along. Clearly the majority of us agree with him.”

But don’t worry, andreipmbcn has figured it all out:

There’s a simple reason for the downvote brigade, and you need to understand the mindset of trolls to see it.

They are scared for their lives.

Trolls don’t “attack” something because it’s wrong or false. They attack it because they believe that, using ridicule, they can destroy it. Here they saw someone state that people who manipulate others with malicious intent should be imprisoned, and that is exactly what trolls are – people who manipulate others with malicious intent. By stating that they should be imprisoned, that there is a growing movement that could do it, and by getting massive upvotes for it, the trolls decided to “rally” in the only way they are capable of and attempt to downvote the post into oblivion. Downvotes they may be, but they are fake.

The +62 vote is a good sign and an indication that the majority of people out there agree with us. So, keep posting. If the trolls downvote, that’s a trolling problem and no indication of disagreement by decent people.

Honestly, I do think we should implement laws against trolling, and give these people the prison time they deserve. It would lead to a much healthier internet and much healthier communities where these creatures live.

He’s a real law-and-order type, this mister.

He thinks downvoting should be illegal too?

Yeah, not surprising considering how popular this is as a cultural trope: Women dates/is married to an asshole, nice guy enters the scene, eventually she realizes she ought to dump her current mate for the nice guy.

Actually, the only movie I can think of where the love interest of the hero is already coupled with a NICE (literally) guy, rather than an asshole, is Superman Returns. Superman comes back from a five-year-tour of space and finds Lois living with a boyfriend who seems a perfectly decent type whom she’s happy with. I thought that was really refreshing. I’m sure there must be SOME other movie/TV show/book like that, but I can’t think of any right now.

Hell, sometimes she is with a perfectly nice person, but we’re still told she ought to dump him and hook up with the hero. Like in Sleepless in Seattle, the fiance seems cool and nice and funny and into her, but he has allergies, and obviously you can’t actually want to marry someone with allergies, so she has to dump him. (I have allergies too so I take this rather personally.)

@sonofadiddly – apology accepted with thanks! 🙂

(I get niggly about it ‘cos my hubby wears fedoras, plus I think they’re really nice hats anyway.)

I’ve got it! This whole system of exchange would work a lot more effectively with swipe cards. No need for contracts and paper trails and log books. This is the 21st century, people.

We can all just carry around swipe cards to keep track of how many sex points we’re owed, and the computer will sort it all out for us at each repair job.

So then do you swipe her vag to redeem it?

I think it is HILARIOUS that these guys think snagging a woman and having sex with her only to never speak to her again, even if you led her to believe you liked her for more than sex, is fine. Actually it is applauded.

But if a woman so much as bats an eyelash at a man without having sex with him it is a crime.
Amazing.

Not all relationships are about sex.
Friendzoning is bad because, Imagine this:

Someone loves you, and you are the ONLY thing they want in life. They try to do everything for you and you push them away. You might be single, but reject them and not give a reason.

So, imagine this, John Smith:

Someone loves you. You don’t love them. You may like them, perhaps, or maybe not. But they want, demand, something of you you’re not willing to give. They want to be a bigger part of your life than you want. They may want access to your body when you don’t want theirs at all. You may love someone else. You may not care for relationships at all.

Why should their wanting you trump your not wanting them? Why should your life be taken over by this person (who sounds, frankly, obsessed – and I say that as someone in a very long-lived and close relationship)?

But of course you’re not really talking about a man being obsessed over this way, are you? You’re just demanding women acquiese to whatever dude is doing it.

Why should we get into relationships we don’t want? What the fuck is in it for us to be stuck with someone we don’t love?

My guess is that women should just be honest from the get-go, more straight forward. They are already protected from physical retribution by law and society’s double standards, and can strike men without any reason with impunity.

I am speaking from experience (albiet, a few bad experiences) when I say this; some women want the satisfaction of having power. I wasn’t the most attractive guy, but I certainly wasn’t the least attractive either; but I tried to pursue a romance or two. I get shot down each and every time.

Then one time, a girl decides to take an interest in me, she asks me to go out with her, and I admit, i wasn’t sure what to make of it. However, I decided ‘Let’s see where this goes.’. Sure, it was one date, there was no sex wanted or had.

The next day, after I had figured things wouldn’t work out between me and the girl i went out with and told her as nice as I could, the same girls I had been rejected by suddenly took an interest in me. Nothing about me changed when I went on that date, as far as I knew. They basically went ‘Oh, someone dated him, so he must have something good.’

My guess is that women should just be honest from the get-go, more straight forward. They are already protected from physical retribution by law and society’s double standards, and can strike men without any reason with impunity.

Retribution for what? Are you saying you’re mad that it’s illegal to hit a woman for not being straight forward with you? Never mind how wrong you are that women are protected from violence by law. Never mind how wrong you are about women being allowed to hit men with impunity. That was very, very creepy. Fuck away.

Holy shit, where to start.

They are already protected from physical retribution by law and society’s double standards, and can strike men without any reason with impunity.

What kind of backwards land do you live in? My state’s laws regarding assault don’t actually mention gender, and yet women nevertheless suffer much higher rates of domestic abuse than men.

some women want the satisfaction of having power.

“Some men want the satisfaction of having power.” Would you deny the truth of that statement, or criticize those men? I want to hear you criticize men who desire political or economic power and tell them they are being bad nasty people.

But oh, it’s different with women, because we’re talking about sexual power here, not political or economic power. Nope, no misogyny in the assumption that female power = sexual power.

They basically went ‘Oh, someone dated him, so he must have something good.’

You should go to Vegas with those mindreading powers. You could make a killing at the poker tables.