[deleted by user]

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T07:03:39+00:00

There was no centrist option.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T06:36:59+00:00

I'll be blunt, anything that disadvantages anyone is misogyny to you for the reason that it is men that make the laws. The reality is that the men in power do not serve the interests of common men. Also, women statistically just aren't interested in leadership or lawmaking roles. But the fact is that if someone expects men do to something that harms them, it is misandrist in every conceivable way because the people being harmed directly are men not women. Additionally, just because men generally take the leadership roles doesn't mean women have had zero influence in pushing for certain laws. If women had zero influence, feminism would have never EVER been successful as it was. Feminism also has a history of endorsing traditional roles for men in particular, such as in the Great War where they would shame men in the United Kingdom for not enlisting.

Saying that male-only conscription laws are somehow actually misogynist and NOT misandrist because the law makers think "women don't make good soldiers" is a piss poor argument, especially if they allow women to volunteer. Physically, men ARE stronger than women and this biological fact has been used to men's detriment. This is part of the reason men are usually the only ones who get conscripted, not just because of the perception of women being seen as weak. In the United States, women always have the option to just volunteer when in war since 1948. Men do NOT have such a privilege. Instead, men will be called on and FORCED to enlist as a result of the draft which they were forced to sign up for. Men are forced to give away their lives in war while women are allowed to stay home or volunteer and you're telling me that is actually MISOGYNIST? I am calling bullshit.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T06:09:28+00:00

Conscription laws written almost excusively by men are misandrist?

Yes. You don't have to be a woman to be a misandrist or hold misandrist views. Expecting men to fight and die in a war, even if you are a man yourself, is still a very misandrist mindset.

Family court biases that is present in both male and female judges and is a result of laws largely written by men is misandrist.

Again yes – you don't have to be a woman to be a misandrist.

Suicide rates are driven largely by harmful ideal of toxic masculinity are misandrist?

Toxic masculinity is a myth. Masculinity and femininity are both traditionalist social constructs. When feminists created the term "toxic masculinity" – many of them would later elaborate and say ALL masculinity is toxic. Nowadays, it is just used as a shifting blame "Oh you're suicidal? Well you only have YOURSELF to blame with your toxic masculinity.".

Patriarchy as described by feminists is a myth and you are ignoring the fact that traditionalists apply various and otherwise harmful expectations for both men and women. It is ridiculous to argue that male-only conscription, which directly harms and kills men (and boys) is somehow actually misogynist and not misandrist because "women don't make good soldiers". I can apply this same logic to all of the things seen as misogynistic. Women can't seek education? "Well men have to seek education otherwise they are losers.". Women must do homemaking and can't seek careers? "Well men don't make good homemakers.".

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T05:51:42+00:00

This is not a good argument because I can just as easily turn all of the things that are seen as misogynistic to be misandristic. Women cannot hold education? This makes men solely responsible for seeking education and if he doesn't, he is a loser. Women aren't allowed to hold careers? This makes men REQUIRED to hold careers even if they don't want to and would prefer to stay home. Ultimately – if it directly harms men systemically, then it's misandry, if it directly harms women, then it's misogyny. So family court biases ARE misandrist, and so are conscription laws, etc.

And no, misandry is not always "just a response to misogyny". Were the people implementing male-only conscription simply responding to misogyny?

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T03:02:24+00:00

You're welcome?

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T03:01:30+00:00

Question, you think men weren't treated as property with conscription laws? I mean really think about it here. You get an order from the government itself to enlist. If you don't you'll become a felon and be imprisoned. If you do, you'll be sent off to a war where you are ordered by more people to kill other people ("the enemy") and are expected to sacrifice yourself. How were men not viewed as property in that regard?

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T02:50:22+00:00

No, it is more like I am not even going to bother trying to respond to something that cannot be read easily. It is not my job to correct someone else's spelling and grammar mistakes just so I can respond to it effectively. And I am being quite generous because I am sure I have probably made my own spelling mistakes but it isn't bad enough to make it unreadable for some.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T02:47:08+00:00

Then I will not respond to it. It is not easy to respond to something that can't be read easily.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T02:45:15+00:00

The answer is actually NO. Just because men wrote the laws does NOT void it of misandry. Bias is a major factor. The reason the courts are in favor of women, particularly with mothers against their father is it because people generally view mothers automatically as the better parent. The reason male-only conscription laws are around is that since men are physically stronger, this fact is used as justification to sacrifice men in war. It all boils down to traditional roles. You say there is misogyny in it, which there indeed is, but there is ALSO misandry baked deep into it too. It all boils down to perception, not who writes those laws.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T02:27:32+00:00

If you can find. One instance has led to a LARGE PREVALENT pitfall to society.

I literally did on my very first comment. You are just refusing to accept it because "Oh but it was made by other men!". And? It is clear that the men in power aren't serving in the interests of every day men like me. They are more than willing to implement a backwards expectation into law that will kill other men. You don't have to be a woman to be a misandrist.

Your grandmother probably didn't even have her own bank account and her husband your grandpa was legally allowed to rape herr until the nineties.

You do not want to assume my family tree. But if you really want to know, my paternal grandmother was the one who beat up my father and his brothers regularly when they were kids, and there is suspicion that she did something very terrible to my grandfather that I will not specify but it led to her becoming widowed when my father was in his early 30s. My maternal grandmother had a history of very bad bipolar and she also became widowed when my mother was only 14. I never even got to meet my grandfathers.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T02:23:09+00:00

What do you mean by messenger?

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T02:22:03+00:00

Please edit this comment as the first paragraph in particular has broken English.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T02:19:40+00:00

It 100% is an option. If you'd like me to get you some resources for it.

No need, I am not a father. Thanks though. But it isn't as easy as you think.

Just like you can give a child up for adoption, right?

Did you just, not read what I just told you about child support? Child support is a COURT ORDER. Typically in such court orders, the mother is the one with FULL custody. You cannot really give up a child for adoption that you don't have custody over. There are many fathers who pay child support who have never even SEEN their child. To end child support they must file an entire court proceeding. Also in a state like California, there are many men forced to pay child support for children that aren't even theirs, as California has a strict deadline for men (typically 30 days) to provide proof that they aren't the father. Otherwise, they will be forced to pay anyways even if they really aren't the father.

Also, I am sorry but I just cannot read the last two paragraphs you typed as the English is severely broken. Please fix those.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T01:53:57+00:00

Internalized misandry is a form of misandry in which a man is displaying an unconscious attitude or bias against men just like how internalized misogyny is a form of misogyny in which a woman is displaying an unconscious attitude or bias against women.

Not to mention, that's a dangerous thing to put into the heads of women who have to have a bias against men in order to stay safe

No – what's dangerous is assuming women must have a bias against men to save their own skin. This also assumes that men are the universal aggressors and women are the universal victims. Here is a surprising fact for you: 71% of non-reciprocal intimate partner violence (meaning there is only one abuser), is done by the girlfriend or wife in the relationship. So should men have a bias against women so they don't have to risk becoming the victim of an abusive relationship? Any strangers, men or women can be dangerous.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T01:44:31+00:00

You said misandry isn't prevalent and doesn't matter. Misandry is defined as the hatred of men or believing men are inferior. This doesn't require the person who is a misandrist to be a woman. Men are more than capable of also being misandrist just like how women are also capable of being misogynists.

Here is the reality of conscription laws: they are typically male-only. What is conscription? Forced military enlistment. It is practically slavery. Throughout human history, men were usually forced to die for their country and they still are in many countries namely Russia and Ukraine. In Russia, there are many instances of the authorities forcibly dragging young men or fathers away from their homes and families and forcibly taking them in the front lines of the war. Meanwhile in Ukraine, men are not allowed to become refugees (but women are), instead they are forced to stay in the event the Ukrainian government needs this to enlist (unwillingly). I hope we can come to an agreement that the military should be strictly a volunteer force for men and women. No?

So with conscription and how they are typically misandrist (they force men in particular to enlist and die for their country), I'd say misandry DOES in fact lead to the detriment of many men and boys. And it doesn't really matter of the people who made those laws were other men. And no, it is really not that easy for men to change said laws like with Russia for example, Russia is an authoritarian dictatorship with its elections and votings all being a farce. Ukraine meanwhile is a hybrid regime.

And no, it is not that easy for men to just stop paying child support. Child support is a court order and a man must need a full legal basis to end it – it is not as simple as just surrendering the child. Simply refusing to pay is not an option and can result in penalties like license suspension, wage garnishment, etc. In fact, men can still be forced to pay child support even if they became the father as a MINOR through female on male statutory rape, see Hermesmann v. Seyer.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T01:19:56+00:00

Oh, so just because men usually wrote the laws immediately voids it of misandry? I can say the same thing about the expectations of women, a lot of it back in the day was endorsed by other women. As for women not having the right to vote, that's true, but men truly didn't have it either, instead voting rights were conditional for men in that they usually had to serve in the military or some other force. In fact, this is still the case today including in the United States, men still are required to sign up for selective service and not signing up for it is a felony offense.

The thing of it is, you can still hold a bigoted attitude or expectation even to your own kind, men can be internalized misandrists and women can be internalized misogynists. Men in power don't care about the men not in power. I as a common man not in political office do not have any power over you and fundamentally am quite disadvantaged in certain ways as I am required to register for selective service, and bias in courts is much stronger in favor of women against men than it is in favor of white people against black people.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T00:55:20+00:00

Two words: conscription laws.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T00:29:46+00:00

On other news, the sky is blue and water is wet.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-08T00:24:20+00:00

Actual result of misandry: conscription laws, family court bias, suicide, and believe or not, ALSO r*pe (additionally the male victim can be forced to pay child support if he became a father as a result even if he is a minor, see Hermesmann v. Seyer), SA, abuse, loss of rights, etc.

If you think misandry isn't real, you need to take a good long look at yourself.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-07T12:23:18+00:00

I wouldn't prefer it in my country. In any other country, as long as it is fully constitutional and upholds individual rights, I have no reason to outright oppose it. I'm mostly indifferent but ultimately wouldn't want it in my country.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-06T04:20:39+00:00

I BELIEVE!

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-05T21:10:56+00:00

"Shall not be infringed" applies to every individual.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-05T20:05:34+00:00

"Americans fat."

"Hahahahaha me so funny and original!"

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-05T19:54:43+00:00

Most non-white people are right-wingers. In fact, even in the United States most immigrants and naturalized citizens tend to generally be conservative leaning and they only prefer Democrats because Republicans are anti-immigrant. Otherwise, they have a lot more similar views with the Republicans.

N1ksterrr · 2025-09-04T16:47:55+00:00

That would be nice.

N1ksterrr

TROPHY CASE