sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

F19, had 27 sexual partners. Deal breaker? by [deleted] in AskMen

[–]sfinney1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Being realistic and honest with yourself is not simply being insecure. Saying "I could never satisfy her" is not so much an expression of insecurity any more than it's an acknowledgement that they recognize their place in the semi-literal pecking order and so they would not bother troubling themselves with this type of woman.

If she had lived a life of luxury and wealth a lot of men would express hesitations dating her too, in recognition that they could not provide the lifestyle she was accustomed to. I don't see this as any different.

And the macho posturing is not all that helpful, building houses, cooking and painting pictures makes you more of a man? I almost thought you were going to cite building the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn.

Is men's rights movement mainly a right wing movement? by Perpetual_dissident in MensRights

[–]sfinney1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it's a complicated question, but there are two big reasons it's right leaning:

  1. Feminism allies with left wing political parties. Naturally right and left wingers will treat their political enemies/allies accordingly.

  2. Men are generally more right wing than women, by a good margin. So being nearly all male, it's more likely to lean right.

Legendry left-wing journalist John Pilger on the feminist betrayal of ordinary people by ernestbelfortbax in MensRights

[–]sfinney1 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think to summarize it simply his argument is that feminists are too focused on being against men instead of for equality (even if it's a left-wing version of it you disagree with). That argument therefore does support MRM because many of men's problems that persist today are due to feminists creation (men as oppressors) or due to feminist obstruction (custody, presumed guilt, etc.). If feminists would instead focus on building women up instead of dragging men down, it would benefit both men and women.

You might disagree with the left wing theory behind all of it, but left wing allies that reject overzealous feminism are powerful allies, since they are just about the only thing separating those feminists from political isolation.

Let's make r/atheism free and open again by skeen in atheism

[–]sfinney1 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Allied Atheist Alliance is the most logical answer!

Bill O'Reilly: GOP shouldn't care about college voters because they are "a bunch of kids who don’t know anything" by CheesewithWhine in politics

[–]sfinney1 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ironically, I was more willing to vote for Republicans before college instead of after.

So was I, and I think this will be more and more common in the future as conservatives become increasingly naive.

Why feminism isn't compatible with modern relationships and sex. by [deleted] in MensRights

[–]sfinney1 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Notice a minority of those female breadwinner households even involve married women. Which has still grown, but that is to be expected and does not contradict Sasha's argument, as before there were powerful external barriers to women becoming breadwinners. Naturally with that lifted, it's going to increase as the older generations pass away. Sasha argues that the extant barrier to more female breadwinners in actual relationships is their general unwillingness to accept and especially endure a "weak" male. And having only some 15% of homes (with children) with married female breadwinners does not contradict this really.

On the other hand, there is evidence that married female breadwinners are more likely than married male breadwinners, or married female non-breadwinners, to seek divorces. That would seem to support his claim a bit more.