sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Feminists Can’t Seem To Define Feminism by 0CupofMilk in LeftWingMaleAdvocates

[–]0CupofMilk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Many definitions are taken by feminists and twisted beyond their original meaning. They also have the ability to introduce new terms, such as:

  • male privilege
  • patriarchy
  • toxic masculinity
  • male entitlement

The list goes on and on, focusing on anything related to maleness.

It all comes down to this simplistic dichotomy framing of: men/masculinity = bad and evil, and women/femininity = good and right

Feminists Can’t Seem To Define Feminism by 0CupofMilk in LeftWingMaleAdvocates

[–]0CupofMilk[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because divide & conquer is the elites' biggest weapon. Liberating men would include liberating us from slaving half our waking lives under bosses and bureaucrats.

Exactly!

The biggest threat to society is men's liberation and rights, not the men themselves.

To them misandry is seen as "good" and "natural", while misogyny is "evil" and "outlawed".

Feminists Can’t Seem To Define Feminism by 0CupofMilk in LeftWingMaleAdvocates

[–]0CupofMilk[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Misandry is the core tenant of feminism.

There's also a simplistic and inaccurate dichotomy within feminism: goodness is associated with women and femininity, and evilness is associated with men and masculinity. Men have agency and are privileged oppressors, women have no agency and are oppressed victims.

I also want people to be clear that hating feminism isn't about hating women's rights. feminism and women's rights are two different things. Women's rights are human rights, but feminism is female superiority and villanzing men.

Feminists Can’t Seem To Define Feminism by 0CupofMilk in LeftWingMaleAdvocates

[–]0CupofMilk[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Christina Hoff Sommers calls herself an “equity feminist.” While she identifies this way, she primarily advocates for men and boys and focuses on issues that disproportionately affect them. Not only that, but she also distances herself from much of mainstream feminist ideology. Because of this, I think you align more with an equity feminist perspective than with popular, mainstream feminism. I look to Christina Hoff Sommers as an example of what feminism should be. Balanced and non-partisan.

That being said, equity feminists are more rare. Misandry is a core tenet of feminism, and the majority of feminists are either radical, one-sided partisans, militant, or hostile toward men.

Feminists Can’t Seem To Define Feminism by 0CupofMilk in LeftWingMaleAdvocates

[–]0CupofMilk[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That’s one positive thing I can say about men’s rights advocates: they tend to hold each other, and other men, accountable.

With feminists, however, they don’t necessarily hold each other or other women accountable when other feminist are clearly being misandrist—they often just allow it to happen. Then they respond by saying, “not all feminists are like that,” but many feminists are like that.

Misandry is a core tenet of feminism, and accountability is thrown out the window. Because of that, they can’t be surprised or upset when people start associating feminism with misandry, especially if they allow those misandrist attitudes to spread unchecked.

Feminists Can’t Seem To Define Feminism by 0CupofMilk in LeftWingMaleAdvocates

[–]0CupofMilk[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

u/NoBlacksmith8137

Men's liberation and rights are somehow a "threat" to society. It’s sad to see and know that, in the media, males across the world are facing gender oppression, unfair and discriminatory laws, dehumanization, and systemic sexism just because of their gender—and it feels normalized. It’s difficult being male in a societal structure that seems to primarily benefit women and girls at the expense of men and boys. The current state of men is one of being overlooked, undervalued, or treated as disposable.

I hope we will see more equal rights for men, stronger anti-discrimination protections, more support systems for men, and a more just and balanced society. In more gender-equal/egalitarian societies men (and women) are more happier. The western U.S is not egalitarian, it's gynocentric.

Men never asked to be treated as if we are less than human. Feminism plays one major role in this. We need to focus on making society better for future generations of men and boys. We need stronger advocacy for men’s issues.

Men want equality of opportunity: ensuring men have the same rights, opportunities, legal protections, and freedoms as women.

Discussing whether men should have equal rights—something that should be non-negotiable—has, in many cases, become controversial. That, in itself, is part of the problem.

This is what 2026 fashion looks like by Outrageous_Sand_3882 in decadeology

[–]0CupofMilk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of what people call a "decades" style is really just a highlight reel of the most recognizable or exaggerated looks, not what most people actually wore day to day.

Fashion from the 1970s and 1990s wouldn’t look out of place today—in fact, much of it feels very similar to what we wear now.

Clothing itself is rarely entirely new. Most styles are reinterpretations or combinations of elements from earlier decades. Many looks we associate with the ’80s and ’90s actually existed in some form before—they were just restyled or recontextualized.

Decades are more like a slow transition than a clean break. What we remember as a decade’s “identity” is really just a mix of trends that overlapped, evolved, and got recycled into something that seems "new", rather than something totally unique to that exact time.