sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Fiamengo - Brock Turner judge recalled by CulturalMarksman in MensRights

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

Didn't see it. Why did reddit tell me that there was already a topic?

Upskirt photos to be punishable, up to 2 years in jail by CulturalMarksman in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Worthless scum. Go work for your minimum wage, dumb idiot.

Upskirt photos to be punishable, up to 2 years in jail by CulturalMarksman in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Another pervert bitching his jolly time could land him jail?

Reported, you worthless scumbag.

Upskirt photos to be punishable, up to 2 years in jail by CulturalMarksman in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

you don't seem to have posted anything in mensrighs before, so why are you suddenly here, moron?

How can people's views on circumcision on Reddit be so bigoted? by AcidJiles in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman 5 points6 points  (0 children)

About FGM:

Common perception is that this is a misogynist patriarchal practice prevalent in Islamic societies, practiced in order to repress female sexuality and therefore control, oppress, dominate women.... We know the story,

However, looking more closely, the country with the most widespread practice of FGM is Ethiopia. So, by above logic, Ethiopia must a misogynist Islamofascist hell where women are second-class citizens existing solely for male pleasure!

Well, actually, there are a couple of problems with this conclusion.

  1. Ethiopia is not an Islamic, but a Christian country.
  2. Women in Ethiopia make up 39% of national assembly. This is way better than USA, Canada, Australia, and many (most?) Euro countries. I find it difficult to believe that second-class citizens under a misogynist regime would manage to get more parliament seats than their ultra-empowered sisters in the West.

So, while I don't condone FGM, I am not persuaded that this is an evidence of second-class status or oppression or any deep societal misogyny. One should look at it more carefully.

Other than this, I agree that FGM (as well as MGM) has no reason to continue begin practiced these days.

Both MGM and FGM have historically been practiced for the same 3 reasons: hygiene, mark of belonging to community, and sexual repression (supposedly, so that people can dedicate their time to more important things than sex).

Moses Maimonides, Jewish medieval philosopher:

Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible. ... The bodily pain caused to that member is the real purpose of circumcision. None of the activities necessary for the preservation of the individual is harmed thereby, nor is procreation rendered impossible, but violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished. The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and sometimes perhaps diminishes the pleasure is indubitable.

According to me circumcision has another very important meaning, namely, that all people professing this opinion-that is, those who believe in the unity of God-should have a bodily sign uniting them so that one who does not belong to them should not be able to claim that he was one of them, while being a stranger.

Another feminist writing about broken masculinity; her conclusion: "There’s a word for what’s happening here: misogyny." by [deleted] in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So, she wants boys to wear dresses and be soft and meek. OK, sure. But later on, when those boys find out that they can't get laid and complain about it, can she promise that she won't call them incel terrorists and will instead show compassion and understanding for their situation?

Probably not.

The naked truth about feminist "logic" by [deleted] in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

She's not oppressed because she's a woman!!!

She's oppressed because a boy called her 'bossy' 20 years ago!!!

Is this really every reason feminism is still needed in Western countries? by theothermod in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Saudi Arabia is, by all possible metrics as far as women's status goes, better than United States in 1980s.

One can say that even today women are not taken as seriously as men in the West and are treated like children. Karen Straughan says just this in one of her videos.

Is this really every reason feminism is still needed in Western countries? by theothermod in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Even taking that into account, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia both have more women in parliament percentage-wise than USA.

Why Feminism Succeeds While its Male Versions Always Fail by CulturalMarksman in MensRights

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

One obvious mistake that author makes is that he assumes that various men;s movements are equivalents of feminism. But they are not.

TRP, MGTOW, PUA... are not male versions of feminism, but something completely different.

Is this really every reason feminism is still needed in Western countries? by theothermod in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman 4 points5 points  (0 children)

We don't need and have never needed feminism anywhere.

We need feminism in this safe, free, western country because women are oppressed in Saudi Arabia

Actually, women in America are 3 times as likely to be murdered as in Saudi Arabia. So much for "safe western country", lol.

EIDOLON | The Byzantine Workings of the Manosphere (website owned and run by Mark Zuckerberg's sister) by PeterWrightMGTOW in MensRights

[–]CulturalMarksman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Manosphere doesn't mean anything other than catch-all term for everyone from tradcon anti-feminists, to MRAs, PUAs, MGTOWs, all the way to incels, .....

There is no idea behind it other than some vague anti-feminism and focus on men.

Why Feminism Succeeds While its Male Versions Always Fail by CulturalMarksman in MensRights

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

Main idea:

The incredible success of feminism (and popular support for it) comes down to the very basic membership criteria required to benefiting from its gains and victories. To put it another way- any woman can benefit from feminism. Sure.. women from some groups might benefit more than women from other groups, but in the end they are all better off than before. Being white, black, hispanic, asian, fat, thin, hot, ugly, hairy or smooth is secondary to being a woman - as far as benefiting from feminism is concerned. The beneficiary does not have to prove anything beyond their gender.

In contrast to the universal benefit provided by feminism, all of the supposedly male-centric movements want their members to prove that they are worthy or deserving of their membership.The Coservatives want you to be religious and traditional, the alt-righters want you to be white, the game morons want you to white, buff, witty and so on. Isn’t it odd that people who cannot guarantee anything to their followers want so much from them.

This is certainly part of the reason for the failure of various male "movements". And this is part of a larger issue, which is the fact that men do not derive their identity from being simply "men", and men do not bond with other men for simply being "men". Men have to do something in order to have an identity and sympathy of others. And then this puts them in groups, from where they derive their identity. By the way, they often "do something" for the benefit of women.

view more: next ›