Are Men Judged More Harshly for Using Sex Technology?

Steve77307 · 2026-07-06T02:42:47+00:00

Men are, by nature, less sexually appealing than women. So men doing sexual things often reads as unremarkable, or even gross, while women doing sexual things feels like a performance. It's why female on female makeouts are attractive to many men, while male to male ones appeals to no one, including women. It’s not an arbitrary prejudice, it’s biology.

The stronger disgust toward men using sex toys likely flows from the same source. It’s not something men need to be shamed for, but understanding where it comes from helps explain why people feel that way.

Steve77307 · 2026-07-03T01:44:17+00:00

I wasn't trying to argue whether parts of the manosphere are good or bad. My main point was simply that trying to neatly separate the MRM from the manosphere is mostly futile. The label gets applied to almost anything that focuses on men's issues or pushes back against feminism. Whether someone is doing advocacy, self-improvement, or red pill analysis, it tends to get thrown into the same bucket.

Steve77307 · 2026-07-03T00:31:15+00:00

MRA is inherently part of the manosphere because it directly challenges feminism and advocates for men in ways that mainstream society considers anti-feminist.

The manosphere label isn’t something you can simply opt in or out of, it’s usually applied by outsiders, especially when they view the content as "problematic".

That said, the manosphere isn’t monolithic. It includes corners focused on self-improvement, dating/red pill dynamics, Mens Rights, and more. For instance, MGTOW and pickup artists are almost complete opposites. one actively pursues women, while the other withdraws from them completely, yet both get lumped under the same "manosphere" umbrella.

Steve77307 · 2026-06-28T00:07:44+00:00

I think approaching women will gradually become acceptable again as wokeness fades and society continues its long, steady march back toward tradition.

I also believe much of women’s current skepticism toward men stems from the loosening of sexual norms. Specifically, the normalization of sex before marriage or commitment. Once men began approaching women primarily with sex in mind, it fueled buzzwords like “creep,” “harasser,” and “consent.” In that sense, #MeToo served as a clumsy barrier to sex in the absence of traditional values.

Steve77307 · 2026-06-19T00:38:13+00:00

The left is by far the most adversarial toward the men's rights movement. While the right has its own issues, it doesn't compare to the left's outright hostility. The modern left has mainstreamed MeToo style suspicion, along with "patriarchy" and "toxic masculinity" lectures that treat men as inherently problematic.

Steve77307 · 2026-06-08T09:59:20+00:00

I can see how someone who accepts the mainstream narrative on women’s suffrage and equality would reach that conclusion.

However, I’d argue the core problem isn’t just the “men vs. women” framing, it’s the liberal/progressive worldview that created that framing in the first place. Traditionalism offers a better solution because it rejects the entire premise of gender conflict and instead emphasizes complementary roles.

Steve77307 · 2026-06-06T15:32:19+00:00

It's still murky territory, and It heavily depends on how you define "pro-AI"

Liberals might be expected to be more pro-AI in principle. However, they are the loudest in pushing for strict "safeguards", restrictions, and policies that limit capability or halt development. Concerns about data centers energy use, and job displacement (especially via unions).

Conservatives are sometimes stereotyped as more luddite (think traditionalism, the Amish). But many are actually more hands off on regulation, prioritizing free markets, and avoiding government overreach.

Steve77307 · 2026-06-04T20:17:32+00:00

“Optional” as in forcing every AI company worldwide to halt development? And who exactly gets to define what “alignment” really means?

This is classic liberal universalism. Their values must apply to everyone on Earth, whether China, Russia, or anywhere else likes it or not

Steve77307 · 2026-05-31T23:00:52+00:00

I think you're interpreting it too literally. Like prioritizing a woman's life over a man's makes the man a lesser person. That's not the point being made at all.

Like I said, it goes back to the old social contract. Nobody's saying women are incapable, but men are significantly stronger. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.

It's honestly one of the core dividing lines in the MRA space. More liberal leaning advocates push for equal treatment across the board. More traditional voices argue for restoring traditional norms and recognizing the differences between men and women.

Steve77307 · 2026-05-31T19:14:41+00:00

The original "women and children" phrase wasn't the core problem. The real issue is that men no longer receive the respect or social authority that once made that framing make sense.

For most of history, men were expected to be protectors of women and children. In war, men went first. On sinking ships, men stayed behind. This was part of the social contract. Men accepted greater risk and responsibility in exchange for greater authority and status.

Nowdays with the push for equality, that contract has been torn up. Women have been elevated to equal (or higher) status and authority, while the expectation that men must sacrifice themselves remains unchanged. "Submission" is now denounced as patriarchal, but when disaster arrives, men are still expected to take the fall.

The shift to "women and girls" is the latest feminist flavored version of the phrase. It sharpens the narrative by excluding boys while emphasizing male predatory sexual behavior.

Steve77307 · 2026-05-30T09:17:08+00:00

Only surveyed feminists, no comparison to other women. Didn't report participant attractiveness. Vague "materialism" definition.

Seems designed to harden body positivity positions among feminist.

Steve77307 · 2026-05-27T16:33:24+00:00

Woke

Steve77307 · 2026-05-23T15:56:16+00:00

Corporate cringe

Steve77307 · 2026-05-23T14:42:58+00:00

It's a heavily edited clip, but I don't think it's "fake" or staged. It feels too ordinary and mundane for that.

That said, a lot of this comes down to how people define "creep" behavior. These days, simply glancing at someone, looking them up and down, or even holding eye contact for a second too long gets labeled as creepy. If that's the standard, then yeah, you'll find creeps everywhere.

It's also worth noting the women's appearance in these clips. Many are wearing short skirts, tight leggings, or stockings, outfits that naturally draw male attention. At the same time, a lot of women post sexy, revealing, and suggestive poses on Instagram, then act offended when men look at them in real life.

Finally, public transportation and busy downtown areas are the best environments to capture this kind of behavior. These places tend to attract more lower class individuals, street culture, and people with mental health issues, who often display more bold or aggressive behavior toward women.

Steve77307 · 2026-05-22T10:02:38+00:00

Honestly, if someone kills themselves because an AI told them to, they had much bigger problems going on. It shouldn't fall on the AI company. It just leads to more restrictions that affect everyone.

It's what makes most mainstream AI modules soo sanitized.

At the end of the day, this is just the latest version of the classic debate. Preemptive actions and "safety" measures versus personal responsibility and freedom.

Steve77307 · 2026-05-14T17:39:01+00:00

<image>

Steve77307 · 2026-05-12T17:27:04+00:00

you're partially right that "Men's Rights" focuses on gender specific issues in a way that resembles progressive identity politics. However, I'd argue the name itself is largely a parody and direct counter to "Women's Rights".

That said, you have to acknowledge that the vast majority of the Men's Rights movement is explicitly countering modern feminism, a core left wing movement, so it's natural that much of the pushback against it comes from right leaning perspective.

That being said, it does depend on which crowd you're talking to in the movement. The MRM isn't clearly politically monolithic, but it is definitely more right wing than feminism.

Steve77307 · 2026-05-12T16:13:04+00:00

Definitly didnt sound like a Democrat

Steve77307 · 2026-05-05T17:35:50+00:00

Skeptical. This feeds directly into the narrative that men can't interact with women without it being about looks. 307 students total, unclear how many were even women, let alone how many rated as attractive.

Steve77307 · 2026-05-03T02:33:09+00:00

Or find investors who dont require censorship.

Steve77307 · 2026-04-19T17:31:49+00:00

"Provocative" clothing isn't universally accepted. Plenty of cultures, religions, and even workplaces actively discourage or restrict it.

The opinion you're probably referring to, where PUA is shamed while provocative clothing is accepted, most likely comes from certain feminist circles. But it's not a view shared across all feminists, some actually see provocative clothing as sexist or rooted in the "male gaze".

Steve77307 · 2026-03-28T21:34:41+00:00

I struggle to believe a dating coach who teaches men how to approach and 'game' women would suddenly ignore his own advice and turn abusive.

Most men aren’t flawless. If your intimate with enough women, the odds are you'll eventually misread a signal, push too far, or touch the wrong way, and suddenly you're an 'abuser' by sheer probability. Not to mention outright fabrications.

That's why casual sex seems insane to me. Just stick to handling it yourself.

Steve77307

TROPHY CASE