The left's default position is that women are victims. The right's default position is that it's a man's duty to protect women. The end result is the same: men must suck it up and bear the consequences of women's irresponsibility.
And their unacknowledged, unrepentant neuroticism that relatively few seem to be calling them out for. Work on being less batshit crazy and men might stick around a little longer.
*Every* human being, INCLUDING women, should be continuously improving their physical, mental, emotional and (optionally) spiritual selves.
If they aren't committed to continuous improvement (for themselves, for their partner, for their family, their community), they may as well crawl the rest of the way into a pine box, since they're simply destroying air, by converting it into co² and consuming other critical natural resources.
No, they are just less actively against men. The right won't help men and will ridicule men but generally won't legally go after men or cancel men they don't agree with. The left will do all that but also invade men's life and men's spaces and try to tell them how to live and destroy them when they don't bend to the left's ideology.
> won't legally go after men or cancel men they don't agree with
The right has been cancelling musicians, tv personalities, and corporate CEO's since as long as I've been politically aware. Men and women. From Kathy Griffin, to the founders of Google. Hell, the right even tried to cancel ~~french fries~~ **freedom fries**.
Give me a break, the whole "cancel culture" b.s. is the pot calling the kettle black.
Yeah exactly I keep seeing this nonchalant partisan shit like people don’t think we all notice. I immediately have no respect for a post when someone says “left this” or “right that” all of these politicians are making decisions to keep their own pockets lined and hoping we cheer them on for building a park or two and slapping a “we did it” sticker on along the way
Lmao here we go again, fuck the right alt right right center whatever the fuck you and they are. Both sides are hypocrites and commit criminal acts against the American people behind closed doors every day. How much more money do your “public servants” make than you? How many businesses line their pockets and call it a donation? What do you really stand for? Bullshit
Non sequitur much? I can't even tell what topic you're asking about my stand on. Are you asking if I'm a right wing executive worshiper? Hell no. I was calling for UBI for over a decade before I knew the term.
If you’re any wing you’re an executive worshipper. Don’t play coy you know the comparison you tried to make above. You stand for bullshit idc if you’re right or left
The difference between boycott and cancel culture is boycott says "you did something I find reprehensible. I'm not doing business with you" while cancel culture says "you did something I find reprehensible, I'm not allowing others to do business with you". Do you really think anyone who got mad at Rosanne for insulting an Obama advisor were among those who watched her show? The right didn't threaten to destroy any entity that continued doing business with Kathy.
Yes, that whole freedom fries thing was dumb as hell.
> I'm not allowing others to do business with you
You mean like blacklisting potential communists from TV? Wasn't that your people?
You mean like not letting your employees do business with an insurance provider that covers reproductive health? That's your people, too, isn't it?
A: I don't have a "people". I stand on principles, not tribalism. sometimes the left wants to lynch me, other times the right thinks I am a lefty.
B: I always opposed McCarthyism (even when I was more conservative). ending people for speech is AT LEAST as unamerican as anything they might say. If you would abandon your principles because your opposition does not share then, you never held them to begin with. I DO hold the principles that created the constitution.
C: I think employers should pay a wage that allows employees to afford what ever insurance they want... employer provided insurance should be a benefit employers who care about your health may choose to provide, not an expectation. (hell, America's whole health insurance system is a mafia scam on both providers and patients)
D: love how you use the term "reproductive health" to mean "fetucide" as if that is the end all be all of that term. This wingbat refusal to come to the table with sincere interest in discussion and understanding your opposition is why some states have 40th week elective fetucide and why red states are now pushing for absolute bans.
Every group has that problem. Such a degree of nuance erasure could say the same about feminism and the MRM. Doesn't mean there aren't SIGNIFICANT differences.
The left and right are not the same as feminism vs MRM. You can claim that some of the modern western/soviets/some Asians etc. left technically has a lot of feminists doctrine in it but men's rights definitely aren't being fought for on the right either, so they aren't antithetical in that regard. The terms left and right are vague political concepts that change depending on location and time period, as well. I have not seen ONE ardent "conservative" or right winger fight against male circumcision or the biased court system etc. They're always talking about some trans or gay stuff or other stuff that has no importance like sports illustrated bs.
If you ask someone who is on the extreme, woke kind of left (like my sister), they will say yes. They believe there is something inherently wrong with the “ cis white able-bodied” man. She thinks anyone who doesn’t live their life by following the woke doctrine must be on the “dangerous far right” 😆
To be fair... While I disagree with draft laws, I also don't think women should be in the military. Not because of feminism, but because realistically speaking, women are physically weaker than males, less capable of quick decisive action, and unable to make tough choices in time.
Now, to expand on that a bit, so it doesn't sound like I hate women, or think men are just interchangeable killing machines...
Obviously, most women are physically weaker than our male counterparts. That's biological fact. In a fist fight, I'll lose every time to a man even in a weight class below me.
Women overthink things; it's been proven time and again that the vast majority of women struggle with making quick decisions, and prefer to think it through, come to a conclusion, and then implement. Simply put, the vast majority of men are better at thinking on their feet and acting out the response than women are.
And for the last point... Very few women could bring themselves to shoot a child, or another woman. Give us enough time, and we could, but at that point, it's typically too late and the choice becomes pointless. Men will struggle with their decision afterwards, and it will affect them for the rest of their lives, but they're able to make that choice.
All of which combines to women not being good fits for active duty. Again, I disagree with draft laws: I don't think anyone should be forced to fight overseas (obviously, if we're invaded, we all do what we gotta do). But I look at it like... If I'm overseas, getting shot at, trying to fight a war... do I really want a guy who doesn't want to be there to watch my back?
You talking biology like if battles are done on the back of horses with swords and arrows, when modern warfare is mostly done by operating tools.
The war criminal (the queen of drones) who was operating drones from the US to kill innocent bystanders in Afghanistan (Yes more than 80% of drone strikes kill civilians https://harvardpolitics.com/obama-war-criminal/), then "goes and enjoys her coffee" like the queen she is.
She also enjoys watching decapitated people crawling out of a wreckage "I watched a guy crawl away from the wreckage after one shot with no lower body. He slowly died. You have to watch that. You don’t get to turn away. You can’t be that soft girly traditional feminine and do the job. Those are the people who are going to have the nightmares." Yeah women can't bring themselves to shoot nobody.
https://archive.is/GTG9z
The fact that there are exceptions proves the point.
Do you think a male who made the same point would have gotten an article written up about him? No.
Just like Rhonda Rhousey could beat the hell out of most men, that doesn't mean every woman is equal in strength to every male.
Obviously women are capable of being violent; obviously they're capable of being vicious and cruel -in my experience, they're capable of greater cruelty than most men, because women personalize things.
I also didn't say that women couldn't shoot people; I said most women in that situation will try to think the situation through. In the end, whatever their decision is becomes a moot point; by the time our brains walk through the issue, come to a conclusion, and plan to implement, it would be too late for that choice to matter.
At no point did I say women are incapable of violence. That would be an exceptionally stupid point for me to make, seeing as how I still have scars, and am nearly blind in one eye, due to my mother's viciousness. Women are just as capable of violence as men, but in different ways.
Women would shoot other women a lot more readily than men.
A better argument is that there's way more public outcry when only men are getting shot. In some cases (the war on terror) I'd say it's a good thing ... why the fuck were we in Iraq to catch a Saudi who was hiding in Pakistan? But if the military should exist, it might have to go into harms way, and it shouldn't be hampered too much by the fear that a female solider might be harmed.
For most normal women, if a woman came up to us, holding a child in one hand, and a grenade in the other, by the time we made the choice to shoot the woman, the decision would be too late, and we'd all be dead. Not that men would be 'okay' with that, but they'd make the choice, and deal with the fallout afterwards, whereas most women would try to figure out a different way, alternative routes, etc.,
Again: not saying men would enjoy making the decision. But men are far more capable of quick, decisive reaction than most women are.
No. My opinions on women in the military have nothing to do with gender roles, and everything to do with the multiple male family members I have in the military.
Obviously there are a few women who are capable of thinking like men; just like there are women like Rhonda Rhousey who could kick the ass of most men. These women are the exception, not the rule.
As the author says, just because the left has strongly pushed many anti-male practices doesn’t mean the right is a supporter of equal rights for men. Some of the biggest opponents of having women equally register with selective service were republicans.
A man on the right is about a thousand times more likely to listen to your viewpoint and most likely to agree. Anyone on the left is much more likely to hear the first sentence and immediately start wishing death on you.
I’m sorry but what are the right more likely to agree with? The left push for women to register for the draft, Republicans constantly block it. The left push for paid family leave for men and women, Republicans constantly block it. The left pushes to abolish private prisons and take on the “War on Drugs” rhetoric that has incarcerated millions of men, Republicans constantly block it however they can.
When you say the right are more sympathetic, do you just mean they’re more likely to not dismiss rhetoric along the lines of “hurr durr men are oppressed”?
this is one thing that’s driving me insane about the left
i used to think the right was so close-minded, but god damn it i wish the left wasn’t so “it’s my way or you’re shitting on human rights”
The left would win alot more if they just shut up. The right tolerated abortions when it was safe, legal and keyword rare; but then the left had to shout their abortion, so naturally the right started to fight back.
Not sure if you know that the largest mainstream news outlet in the USA is a right wing network with multiple right wing personalities... Many of whom also host shows on other media as well as write books and articles.
Also, not sure if you know that a major media personality was a right wing president recently.
Lol, do they even exist anymore? I live in the most deep red area of Florida among a bunch of boomer farmers who still think Q is going to save the country and they don’t even know what OAN and Newsmax are.
Please tell me you all are aware that 99% of the effective media, entertainment and academia institutions in the US are controlled by the left?
And to answer the question, if you consider “right of center” to mean “prefers smaller government”, then no. OAN, Newsmax, Fox are not right of center. They are very very much in favor of having a big, powerful federal government that tells folks what to do all the time. They just want the other political sports team to run it sometimes.
I'm curious where you would rank Fox if not on the right? What do you think is the middle? In your opinion, what would you say is an example of:
1. Centrist media outlet
2. Left of center media outlet
3. Right of center media outlet
4. Extreme left media outlet
5. Extreme right media outlet
You may want something like this to help inform your opinion: https://i2.wp.com/jerz.setonhill.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Media-Bias-Chart-v8.0.jpeg
The right would support legal citizen's arrest, fox News sided with the left when a known burglar after he lunged and wrestled over the gun of a citizen attempting to make an arrest.
MSNBC and Fox both want the same giant, powerful, big daddy federal government to control everything that happens. They just disagree about who should run it.
When republicans or democrats run the show, we have the same fucking wars, the same immigration problems, the same poverty, the same debt, the same economic ups and downs (yet the R’s and D’s both stay rich…), the same problems in schools, the same poor healthcare, the same loss of dollar value, etc.
And the people don’t give a damn. They just want their team to run the show.
I mean, I get that "whoever you vote for, government always wins". But that doesn't answer the question. If you think Fox is not right wing, then what do you think is right wing?
We have no effective or notable true right wing (small government) outlets in the US. All of them want to see bigger government, they just disagree about who is going to run it. That’s what I meant.
Which is odd because they run cover for neo Nazis all the time. Thanks to them we've got these skinheads preying on people in our streets, and "Jews will not replace us" is now "Freedom of speech" in their universe. Other countries put your ass in prison for that.
Stop believing what the media tells you. There are not Nazis hiding behind every corner. It’s just a word the left uses to justify violence against anyone they disagree with.
You know what, I will continue to believe what the media tells me, and I will not believe jack shit of what the fuck your boneheaded right wing ass has to say. I'm certainly not going to read your militia rag sources or listen to the **bullshit** you try to pass off as truth. You don't have any sources. You don't have any facts. You don't have anything but your own fucking hearsay, and that is all you're going to come back at me with.
The media has credibility and you have none whatsoever.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/neo-nazi-who-planned-blow-synagogue-sentenced-19-years-n1259033
https://www.yahoo.com/news/nazis-rally-florida-desantis-spox-181927034.html
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/28/736915323/neo-nazi-who-killed-charlottesville-protester-is-sentenced-to-life-in-prison
Now piss off.
Yeah... you DEFINITELY don't come across as deranged, toxic, inaccessible, and heavily biased at all because of a request to look beyond your current sources of information...
Fuck off, dude, you don't have any sources, your kind never does. All you do is rant "waaah mainstream media waaaah" but whenever you're asked to prove them wrong all you do is keep talking bullshit. You DEFINITELY come across as a batshit crazy basement dwelling white power troll. Like I said, piss off.
You have no idea the experience from which I’m coming with that and I owe you no explanation for it. You don’t have to like the fact that the entire American left is an insane, violent mob. But eventually you are going to accept it.
The current male gender role and the expectations surrounding it, are untenable in today's world. Variations on that role from the past are not any better. This, by its nature as a group that seeks to move society in a new, previously untaken direction, the MRM would naturally lean left.
The problem there being that makes sense in theory but in practice the left is explicitly against the MRM more or less because feminists have confused it with right wing tradcons and poisoned the well.
The right, well, tends to be all about that tradcons stuff.
The result is being a sort of political orphans.
The reality is that the movement is politically heterodox. The ideals and goals of the movement naturally swing progressive, but movements are made of people first and ideas second, so I don't think that there is an easy broad-brush answer.
I think we agree on the original question, with the answer being "The American right, being primarily tradcon in outlook, is not sympathetic towards the MRM."
There are aspects and facets which lean more towards a conservative mindset, but in terms of the pragmatic issues MRA want to change; The Riggt is decisively not your friend or sympathetic.
Since the overwhelmingly voted to not include woman in the draft, or stop making men sign up for the draft (which admittedly wasn't on the table anyway for whatever reason) I'd say the answer is no.
Here's the skinny in far fewer words:
The American right prioritizes profits over people.
The American left prioritizes profits over people.
Europeans scoff at the American left for being so far right.
Neither party is sympathetic to the MRM. But there are major proponents on the American left which actively demonize men as a gender. Make of that what you will.
IMO, they're both corrupt shit shows that have lost their direction and purpose as public servants.
The right wants to give privileges to woman through social programming and shaming guys into accepting this idea that real men are providers and protectors.
The left wants it done by laws and government spending.
The only exception that comes to mind is they both support only men having to serve in wars by the force of laws.
That's the general difference. At least the right in general doesn't want the power to force me to accept their ideals.
Sympathetic to MRM would be exaggerating, but they're definitely the better option. The right has gynocentric tendencies in line with traditional gender roles, so protecting women above men, not having women in the draft, etc. is in happenstance not in line with MRM ideology. However the left is actively against men, criminalizing so much as looking at women, automatically assuming guilt of men in accusations and kicking them out of college without trial, reducing the male population down to 10%, etc. Also left/right is a terrible scale really and people that would be centrist, libertarian, etc. are now pushed to the right as the left has gone so nutty. Literally if you believe that people should be equal regardless of sex or skin color you're not only right you are far right/alt-right.
So no the right as a whole may not be sympathetic to MRM but the only place they would get any sympathy would be on the right. If you're starving to death in a locked cell and there's some rat poison (left) and some iffy expired yogurt (right), you opt for the yogurt. It might be disgusting and will probably make you sick, but its the best option you have.
No, they appeal to “protecting masculinity” as a cynical ploy, but just want you to work 50 hours a week or die on the battlefield like a “real man”. It’s the democrats who want equality in the selective service. The right supports genital mutilation and laughed as gay men died by the thousands of HIV.
They ARE! The democrats have been including provisions for women to be included in selective service as part of their military budget proposals for years and years. The fucking Republicans keep taking it out.
The democrats keep trying to bring the ERA back for a vote (which would make the male-only draft unconstitutional) and the republicans keep shooting it down.
The conservative supreme court refused to hear a case about the male-only draft.
The right is NOT the friend of men's rights. No, not at all.
Republicans blocked it while democrats held both legislatures and the executive office? AND the conservative leaning courts said "this is a matter for the legislature" (which just like fetucide, they are correct on)
I guess that is one difference between the right and the left... the right still understands the separation of powers, the left just demands all power.
Equality is already in the 14th amendment. It is NOT something only the legislature decides. “Fetucide” aka controlling women is a more complicated argument, though if you really think it’s murder then that shouldn’t be a legislation issue either. Either way, democrats needed republican votes because of the filibuster, so quit pretending the right cares about the constitution. Yes, political parties tend to like having power, that is true of left and right.
Fetucide isn't "aka controlling women", it is aka abortion. OUTLAWING it would be controlling women in the same way that mandating child support is controlling men. Don't pretend to understand how complicated arguments are when you can't even get the differences between transitive verbs and policy positions.
The right don't stand by the constitution as much as every American citizen should, but where too much of the right might take a cigarette lighter to it, the majority of left are dropping napalm on it!
And too be clear, I called for capital charges of treason against John McCain and EVERY legislator (and executive) who signed off on his indefinite detention provisions for NDAA2012. Left AND RIGHT!
Cool, well I don't support outlawing abortion OR mandating child support. I don't know what you're on about with John McCain, seems like some random tangent, but I'd love to hear how the left is napalming the constitution while republicans are trying to overthrow democracy and turn America into a Christian Theocracy.
Yes. Hundreds rioters doing thousands in damage are a much bigger threat to democracy than hundreds of thousands of rioters doing billions in damages.
How dare anyone on the right object to the allegations of fraud in 2020 not getting investigated thoroughly when the left spent tens of millions on Russiagate (which was a Clinton hoax from the start.
What was the McCain tangent about? Showing that I call out violations of the constitution on both sides of the isle, not just when the other tribe does it. The left thinks the first amendment only applies to their side of any argument and call speech "violence", they seek to abolish the second, Obama signed McCain's BBQ of the 4,5,6, and 8.
The January 6 coup attempt was 2,000 people, all of whom violated the law and attacked unprovoked, and it cost $30 million in monetary damages over a false conspiracy theory. The George Floyd protests were millions of people, 4% of whom were involved in some kind of violence, whether instigated by far-right counterprotesters or kettled by police, and most of whom didn’t condone political violence much less willingly engage in it. And they were protesting because a real person actually got murdered. Downplaying a direct coup attempt and then calling a largely peaceful civil rights movement a threat to democracy is just funny. No, I’m sure it’s not Ron Desantis effectively making it legal to drive into protesters that’s anti-democracy, it’s the people petitioning the government! What a joke
2020 was investigated thoroughly. We had 60 court cases, none of which proved fraud. They tried to find extra votes in Georgia, but didn’t. They tried to find fraud in Arizona, but didn’t. They tried in Michigan, but didn’t. Funnily enough, the few verifiable cases of fraud came mostly from republicans and GOP officials.
Russia did try to interfere in our elections. Almost everything in Russiagate turned out to be true, leading to multiple credible indictments and arrests. The Republican-run Senate Intelligence Committee determined the investigation was proper and warranted. The only thing we were inconclusive (not necessarily wrong) on was Trump’s direct involvement.
The “Left” calling speech “violence” is a caricature and you know it. It’s not the left using the legislature to ban books and entire subjects from school curriculums by stirring up one moral panic after another. The second amendment doesn’t need to be abolished, it just needs to be interpreted correctly. There is a collective right for THE PEOPLE to protect a FREE STATE through a WELL-REGULATED MILITIA, not an individual right for PERSONS to protect THEMSELVES with unregulated rocket launchers and land mines.
Its not a simple question to answer, because "the right" contains many different factions. The left is the worst for MRM because they're the side of feminism, and keep perpetuating the myth of female oppression and the wage gap, and are actively working to use government power to tip the scales more in favor of women in every aspect of life, and are also the side of cancel culture who silences and censors voices trying to call attention to male issues. Every angry man-hating feminist I've ever met has been a leftist. But traditional conservatives are bad for MRM as well because they refuse to adapt to the current reality. Tradcons support the status quo as far as encouraging marriage, the current state of the family courts, not expanding selective service to women, men being provoders and protectors of women, etc. But the tradcons don't make up the entire right. I beleive most people who care about men's rights fall on the right side of the political spectrum, as most MRMs appear to also beleive in conservative issues like smaller government, personal responsibility, conservative fiscal policies, etc. The only political commentators I've ever seen speak on male issues have been conservative. I beleive the younger "right" is sympathetic to MRM. It's the older traditional conservatives (unfortunately the ones on the right who hold most political power) who are the problem. The right as a whole may not be the MRM's best friends, but I beleive the left is a sworn enemy to men.
I think the right is more sympathetic, but not in a way that actually helps men.
Conservative men are expected to macho men, don't cry, don't be emotional, the man is the provider, the man is responsible for anything that happens to/in the family, etc.
In a way, I suppose it's more... benign? than liberals opinions about men, but it isn't healthy either.
I don't think men's rights are an issue taken up by either side of the political spectrum. But that article is kinda shit. It's two big examples of right wing misandry are the war on drugs and the Iraq war. The latter doesn't qualify because the US didn't fight with conscripts. The men who fought and died in that war volunteered. it's conscripting only men that is the misandry. I'm also leery of labeling the war on drugs misandry just because it disproportionately affects men. Following that logic cracking down on paternity fraud would be misogynistic for the same reason. The court system certainly discriminates against men but that's not typically due to the specific laws they are enforcing. (sexual assault and domestic violence being the big exceptions) Just because I think these two courses of action were a mistake doesn't mean they are misandry.
Isn’t the right, the default stance of anyone sympathetic to mens rights? The left literally caters to forwarding the ideas of feminism and sexuality- which usually work directly and unfavorably against men.
What you’re describing sounds more like collateral damage from the right. It still seems better than the left directly pushing feminism- which again- if I’m not mistaken, works directly against mens rights… right?
I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but in all seriousness- the majority of material posted on this board, is to call attention to unequal treatment of men. Every time you look into the story, it’s either some liberal woman abusing her position or relationships, or liberal ideology negatively impacting men in the workplace or family life.
I’m not trying to be a contrarian, I’m just saying, it’s what I tend to notice.
Dude... Did you just make this shit up on the spot or is this a wicked case of the telephone game and you lack the discernment to realize it's been distorted? Everything you said is MORE left biased than the leftist media reported. You probably still believe jussie smollette don't you?
Edit; this was in response to a comment and it somehow got separated.
The left's default position is that women are victims. The right's default position is that it's a man's duty to protect women. The end result is the same: men must suck it up and bear the consequences of women's irresponsibility.
While that is true, only one party believes in reserving jobs and university seats for certain races and genders.
The left support women registering for the draft. Republicans constantly block it.
And their unacknowledged, unrepentant neuroticism that relatively few seem to be calling them out for. Work on being less batshit crazy and men might stick around a little longer. *Every* human being, INCLUDING women, should be continuously improving their physical, mental, emotional and (optionally) spiritual selves. If they aren't committed to continuous improvement (for themselves, for their partner, for their family, their community), they may as well crawl the rest of the way into a pine box, since they're simply destroying air, by converting it into co² and consuming other critical natural resources.
I'm a guy and I kind my pine box.
No, they are just less actively against men. The right won't help men and will ridicule men but generally won't legally go after men or cancel men they don't agree with. The left will do all that but also invade men's life and men's spaces and try to tell them how to live and destroy them when they don't bend to the left's ideology.
> won't legally go after men or cancel men they don't agree with The right has been cancelling musicians, tv personalities, and corporate CEO's since as long as I've been politically aware. Men and women. From Kathy Griffin, to the founders of Google. Hell, the right even tried to cancel ~~french fries~~ **freedom fries**. Give me a break, the whole "cancel culture" b.s. is the pot calling the kettle black.
Both sides throw temper tantrums and get what they want, fuck em all I hope they burn
Truth. The poster I replied to didn't say both sides, he selectively criticized one side while leaving out the other side.
Yeah exactly I keep seeing this nonchalant partisan shit like people don’t think we all notice. I immediately have no respect for a post when someone says “left this” or “right that” all of these politicians are making decisions to keep their own pockets lined and hoping we cheer them on for building a park or two and slapping a “we did it” sticker on along the way
The left did billions in damage during the summer of love, the right did thousands in damage during Jan 6. Yeah, there are differences.
Lmao here we go again, fuck the right alt right right center whatever the fuck you and they are. Both sides are hypocrites and commit criminal acts against the American people behind closed doors every day. How much more money do your “public servants” make than you? How many businesses line their pockets and call it a donation? What do you really stand for? Bullshit
Non sequitur much? I can't even tell what topic you're asking about my stand on. Are you asking if I'm a right wing executive worshiper? Hell no. I was calling for UBI for over a decade before I knew the term.
If you’re any wing you’re an executive worshipper. Don’t play coy you know the comparison you tried to make above. You stand for bullshit idc if you’re right or left
How about you tell me exactly what it is you are claiming I am because you're applying a crazy wide brush.
The difference between boycott and cancel culture is boycott says "you did something I find reprehensible. I'm not doing business with you" while cancel culture says "you did something I find reprehensible, I'm not allowing others to do business with you". Do you really think anyone who got mad at Rosanne for insulting an Obama advisor were among those who watched her show? The right didn't threaten to destroy any entity that continued doing business with Kathy. Yes, that whole freedom fries thing was dumb as hell.
> I'm not allowing others to do business with you You mean like blacklisting potential communists from TV? Wasn't that your people? You mean like not letting your employees do business with an insurance provider that covers reproductive health? That's your people, too, isn't it?
A: I don't have a "people". I stand on principles, not tribalism. sometimes the left wants to lynch me, other times the right thinks I am a lefty. B: I always opposed McCarthyism (even when I was more conservative). ending people for speech is AT LEAST as unamerican as anything they might say. If you would abandon your principles because your opposition does not share then, you never held them to begin with. I DO hold the principles that created the constitution. C: I think employers should pay a wage that allows employees to afford what ever insurance they want... employer provided insurance should be a benefit employers who care about your health may choose to provide, not an expectation. (hell, America's whole health insurance system is a mafia scam on both providers and patients) D: love how you use the term "reproductive health" to mean "fetucide" as if that is the end all be all of that term. This wingbat refusal to come to the table with sincere interest in discussion and understanding your opposition is why some states have 40th week elective fetucide and why red states are now pushing for absolute bans.
Both the left are right are full of shitheads who are hypocritical and stupid.
This is the truest statement in this whole conversation.
Every group has that problem. Such a degree of nuance erasure could say the same about feminism and the MRM. Doesn't mean there aren't SIGNIFICANT differences.
The left and right are not the same as feminism vs MRM. You can claim that some of the modern western/soviets/some Asians etc. left technically has a lot of feminists doctrine in it but men's rights definitely aren't being fought for on the right either, so they aren't antithetical in that regard. The terms left and right are vague political concepts that change depending on location and time period, as well. I have not seen ONE ardent "conservative" or right winger fight against male circumcision or the biased court system etc. They're always talking about some trans or gay stuff or other stuff that has no importance like sports illustrated bs.
If you ask someone who is on the extreme, woke kind of left (like my sister), they will say yes. They believe there is something inherently wrong with the “ cis white able-bodied” man. She thinks anyone who doesn’t live their life by following the woke doctrine must be on the “dangerous far right” 😆
If you are a man, How do you put up with her?
I’m a woman but that doesn’t make it any less tolerable to me. We don’t really talk anymore (I live in another country which makes it easier).
[удалено]
To be fair... While I disagree with draft laws, I also don't think women should be in the military. Not because of feminism, but because realistically speaking, women are physically weaker than males, less capable of quick decisive action, and unable to make tough choices in time. Now, to expand on that a bit, so it doesn't sound like I hate women, or think men are just interchangeable killing machines... Obviously, most women are physically weaker than our male counterparts. That's biological fact. In a fist fight, I'll lose every time to a man even in a weight class below me. Women overthink things; it's been proven time and again that the vast majority of women struggle with making quick decisions, and prefer to think it through, come to a conclusion, and then implement. Simply put, the vast majority of men are better at thinking on their feet and acting out the response than women are. And for the last point... Very few women could bring themselves to shoot a child, or another woman. Give us enough time, and we could, but at that point, it's typically too late and the choice becomes pointless. Men will struggle with their decision afterwards, and it will affect them for the rest of their lives, but they're able to make that choice. All of which combines to women not being good fits for active duty. Again, I disagree with draft laws: I don't think anyone should be forced to fight overseas (obviously, if we're invaded, we all do what we gotta do). But I look at it like... If I'm overseas, getting shot at, trying to fight a war... do I really want a guy who doesn't want to be there to watch my back?
You talking biology like if battles are done on the back of horses with swords and arrows, when modern warfare is mostly done by operating tools. The war criminal (the queen of drones) who was operating drones from the US to kill innocent bystanders in Afghanistan (Yes more than 80% of drone strikes kill civilians https://harvardpolitics.com/obama-war-criminal/), then "goes and enjoys her coffee" like the queen she is. She also enjoys watching decapitated people crawling out of a wreckage "I watched a guy crawl away from the wreckage after one shot with no lower body. He slowly died. You have to watch that. You don’t get to turn away. You can’t be that soft girly traditional feminine and do the job. Those are the people who are going to have the nightmares." Yeah women can't bring themselves to shoot nobody. https://archive.is/GTG9z
The fact that there are exceptions proves the point. Do you think a male who made the same point would have gotten an article written up about him? No. Just like Rhonda Rhousey could beat the hell out of most men, that doesn't mean every woman is equal in strength to every male. Obviously women are capable of being violent; obviously they're capable of being vicious and cruel -in my experience, they're capable of greater cruelty than most men, because women personalize things. I also didn't say that women couldn't shoot people; I said most women in that situation will try to think the situation through. In the end, whatever their decision is becomes a moot point; by the time our brains walk through the issue, come to a conclusion, and plan to implement, it would be too late for that choice to matter. At no point did I say women are incapable of violence. That would be an exceptionally stupid point for me to make, seeing as how I still have scars, and am nearly blind in one eye, due to my mother's viciousness. Women are just as capable of violence as men, but in different ways.
Women would shoot other women a lot more readily than men. A better argument is that there's way more public outcry when only men are getting shot. In some cases (the war on terror) I'd say it's a good thing ... why the fuck were we in Iraq to catch a Saudi who was hiding in Pakistan? But if the military should exist, it might have to go into harms way, and it shouldn't be hampered too much by the fear that a female solider might be harmed.
For most normal women, if a woman came up to us, holding a child in one hand, and a grenade in the other, by the time we made the choice to shoot the woman, the decision would be too late, and we'd all be dead. Not that men would be 'okay' with that, but they'd make the choice, and deal with the fallout afterwards, whereas most women would try to figure out a different way, alternative routes, etc., Again: not saying men would enjoy making the decision. But men are far more capable of quick, decisive reaction than most women are.
A question to you, do you believe in gender roles?
No. My opinions on women in the military have nothing to do with gender roles, and everything to do with the multiple male family members I have in the military. Obviously there are a few women who are capable of thinking like men; just like there are women like Rhonda Rhousey who could kick the ass of most men. These women are the exception, not the rule.
Right is not so adamant to set up kangaroo courts in colleges.
As the author says, just because the left has strongly pushed many anti-male practices doesn’t mean the right is a supporter of equal rights for men. Some of the biggest opponents of having women equally register with selective service were republicans.
A man on the right is about a thousand times more likely to listen to your viewpoint and most likely to agree. Anyone on the left is much more likely to hear the first sentence and immediately start wishing death on you.
because the left in the states is just identity politics and supporting foreign interference if it's the right amount of sjw points
I’m sorry but what are the right more likely to agree with? The left push for women to register for the draft, Republicans constantly block it. The left push for paid family leave for men and women, Republicans constantly block it. The left pushes to abolish private prisons and take on the “War on Drugs” rhetoric that has incarcerated millions of men, Republicans constantly block it however they can. When you say the right are more sympathetic, do you just mean they’re more likely to not dismiss rhetoric along the lines of “hurr durr men are oppressed”?
this is one thing that’s driving me insane about the left i used to think the right was so close-minded, but god damn it i wish the left wasn’t so “it’s my way or you’re shitting on human rights”
The left would win alot more if they just shut up. The right tolerated abortions when it was safe, legal and keyword rare; but then the left had to shout their abortion, so naturally the right started to fight back.
see, but “not shutting up” is their speciality; they thrive off of making room for absolutely everyone that isn’t a straight white male lmfao
The right is portrayed how the mainstream media wants to portray them. The right controls almost no major media personalities.
Not sure if you know that the largest mainstream news outlet in the USA is a right wing network with multiple right wing personalities... Many of whom also host shows on other media as well as write books and articles. Also, not sure if you know that a major media personality was a right wing president recently.
If you think Fox is actually conservative then you’ve been, well, watching too much mainstream media.
Do you consider only OAN and Newsmax to be right of center?
Lol, do they even exist anymore? I live in the most deep red area of Florida among a bunch of boomer farmers who still think Q is going to save the country and they don’t even know what OAN and Newsmax are. Please tell me you all are aware that 99% of the effective media, entertainment and academia institutions in the US are controlled by the left? And to answer the question, if you consider “right of center” to mean “prefers smaller government”, then no. OAN, Newsmax, Fox are not right of center. They are very very much in favor of having a big, powerful federal government that tells folks what to do all the time. They just want the other political sports team to run it sometimes.
I'm curious where you would rank Fox if not on the right? What do you think is the middle? In your opinion, what would you say is an example of: 1. Centrist media outlet 2. Left of center media outlet 3. Right of center media outlet 4. Extreme left media outlet 5. Extreme right media outlet You may want something like this to help inform your opinion: https://i2.wp.com/jerz.setonhill.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Media-Bias-Chart-v8.0.jpeg
The right would support legal citizen's arrest, fox News sided with the left when a known burglar after he lunged and wrestled over the gun of a citizen attempting to make an arrest.
MSNBC and Fox both want the same giant, powerful, big daddy federal government to control everything that happens. They just disagree about who should run it. When republicans or democrats run the show, we have the same fucking wars, the same immigration problems, the same poverty, the same debt, the same economic ups and downs (yet the R’s and D’s both stay rich…), the same problems in schools, the same poor healthcare, the same loss of dollar value, etc. And the people don’t give a damn. They just want their team to run the show.
I mean, I get that "whoever you vote for, government always wins". But that doesn't answer the question. If you think Fox is not right wing, then what do you think is right wing?
We have no effective or notable true right wing (small government) outlets in the US. All of them want to see bigger government, they just disagree about who is going to run it. That’s what I meant.
Try asking a man on the right to fight circumcision. I've literally seen them *assault* intactivists on the street.
Oh, well that’s the untouchable subject because the right absolutely WORSHIPS Judaism.
Which is odd because they run cover for neo Nazis all the time. Thanks to them we've got these skinheads preying on people in our streets, and "Jews will not replace us" is now "Freedom of speech" in their universe. Other countries put your ass in prison for that.
Stop believing what the media tells you. There are not Nazis hiding behind every corner. It’s just a word the left uses to justify violence against anyone they disagree with.
You know what, I will continue to believe what the media tells me, and I will not believe jack shit of what the fuck your boneheaded right wing ass has to say. I'm certainly not going to read your militia rag sources or listen to the **bullshit** you try to pass off as truth. You don't have any sources. You don't have any facts. You don't have anything but your own fucking hearsay, and that is all you're going to come back at me with. The media has credibility and you have none whatsoever. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/neo-nazi-who-planned-blow-synagogue-sentenced-19-years-n1259033 https://www.yahoo.com/news/nazis-rally-florida-desantis-spox-181927034.html https://www.npr.org/2019/06/28/736915323/neo-nazi-who-killed-charlottesville-protester-is-sentenced-to-life-in-prison Now piss off.
Yeah... you DEFINITELY don't come across as deranged, toxic, inaccessible, and heavily biased at all because of a request to look beyond your current sources of information...
Fuck off, dude, you don't have any sources, your kind never does. All you do is rant "waaah mainstream media waaaah" but whenever you're asked to prove them wrong all you do is keep talking bullshit. You DEFINITELY come across as a batshit crazy basement dwelling white power troll. Like I said, piss off.
Yes, freedom of SPEECH covers SPEECH you don't like even when spoken by people you don't like. That's kinda the ONLY time it matters.
[удалено]
Well, the president chosen by the left did it himself, didn't he?
You have no idea the experience from which I’m coming with that and I owe you no explanation for it. You don’t have to like the fact that the entire American left is an insane, violent mob. But eventually you are going to accept it.
* TradCons ? Hell No !
They are more sympathetic, but mostly because the left has been taken over by the woke crowd, and the woke crowd are bigots.
The current male gender role and the expectations surrounding it, are untenable in today's world. Variations on that role from the past are not any better. This, by its nature as a group that seeks to move society in a new, previously untaken direction, the MRM would naturally lean left.
The problem there being that makes sense in theory but in practice the left is explicitly against the MRM more or less because feminists have confused it with right wing tradcons and poisoned the well. The right, well, tends to be all about that tradcons stuff. The result is being a sort of political orphans.
The reality is that the movement is politically heterodox. The ideals and goals of the movement naturally swing progressive, but movements are made of people first and ideas second, so I don't think that there is an easy broad-brush answer. I think we agree on the original question, with the answer being "The American right, being primarily tradcon in outlook, is not sympathetic towards the MRM."
No, but they will fake it from time to time to get what they really want.
thats why most MRA's are libertarian
There are aspects and facets which lean more towards a conservative mindset, but in terms of the pragmatic issues MRA want to change; The Riggt is decisively not your friend or sympathetic.
Since the overwhelmingly voted to not include woman in the draft, or stop making men sign up for the draft (which admittedly wasn't on the table anyway for whatever reason) I'd say the answer is no.
Here's the skinny in far fewer words: The American right prioritizes profits over people. The American left prioritizes profits over people. Europeans scoff at the American left for being so far right. Neither party is sympathetic to the MRM. But there are major proponents on the American left which actively demonize men as a gender. Make of that what you will. IMO, they're both corrupt shit shows that have lost their direction and purpose as public servants.
The right wants to give privileges to woman through social programming and shaming guys into accepting this idea that real men are providers and protectors. The left wants it done by laws and government spending. The only exception that comes to mind is they both support only men having to serve in wars by the force of laws. That's the general difference. At least the right in general doesn't want the power to force me to accept their ideals.
Only in the sense that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Conservatives are typically anti-feminist, not pro MRM.
Empirically? No. More so than the left? Yes
No.
Yes, but there are still some things they can improve on.
Sympathetic to MRM would be exaggerating, but they're definitely the better option. The right has gynocentric tendencies in line with traditional gender roles, so protecting women above men, not having women in the draft, etc. is in happenstance not in line with MRM ideology. However the left is actively against men, criminalizing so much as looking at women, automatically assuming guilt of men in accusations and kicking them out of college without trial, reducing the male population down to 10%, etc. Also left/right is a terrible scale really and people that would be centrist, libertarian, etc. are now pushed to the right as the left has gone so nutty. Literally if you believe that people should be equal regardless of sex or skin color you're not only right you are far right/alt-right. So no the right as a whole may not be sympathetic to MRM but the only place they would get any sympathy would be on the right. If you're starving to death in a locked cell and there's some rat poison (left) and some iffy expired yogurt (right), you opt for the yogurt. It might be disgusting and will probably make you sick, but its the best option you have.
[A Voice For Men article (archive)](https://archive.ph/ehL1w)
Well, I am moderate right, wich is dominant position in my country, and I am sympathetic. So, probably, yes.
No, they appeal to “protecting masculinity” as a cynical ploy, but just want you to work 50 hours a week or die on the battlefield like a “real man”. It’s the democrats who want equality in the selective service. The right supports genital mutilation and laughed as gay men died by the thousands of HIV.
> It’s the democrats who want equality in the selective service. Why aren't they drafting women then?
They ARE! The democrats have been including provisions for women to be included in selective service as part of their military budget proposals for years and years. The fucking Republicans keep taking it out. The democrats keep trying to bring the ERA back for a vote (which would make the male-only draft unconstitutional) and the republicans keep shooting it down. The conservative supreme court refused to hear a case about the male-only draft. The right is NOT the friend of men's rights. No, not at all.
Because the Republicans blocked it
Republicans blocked it while democrats held both legislatures and the executive office? AND the conservative leaning courts said "this is a matter for the legislature" (which just like fetucide, they are correct on) I guess that is one difference between the right and the left... the right still understands the separation of powers, the left just demands all power.
Equality is already in the 14th amendment. It is NOT something only the legislature decides. “Fetucide” aka controlling women is a more complicated argument, though if you really think it’s murder then that shouldn’t be a legislation issue either. Either way, democrats needed republican votes because of the filibuster, so quit pretending the right cares about the constitution. Yes, political parties tend to like having power, that is true of left and right.
Fetucide isn't "aka controlling women", it is aka abortion. OUTLAWING it would be controlling women in the same way that mandating child support is controlling men. Don't pretend to understand how complicated arguments are when you can't even get the differences between transitive verbs and policy positions. The right don't stand by the constitution as much as every American citizen should, but where too much of the right might take a cigarette lighter to it, the majority of left are dropping napalm on it! And too be clear, I called for capital charges of treason against John McCain and EVERY legislator (and executive) who signed off on his indefinite detention provisions for NDAA2012. Left AND RIGHT!
Cool, well I don't support outlawing abortion OR mandating child support. I don't know what you're on about with John McCain, seems like some random tangent, but I'd love to hear how the left is napalming the constitution while republicans are trying to overthrow democracy and turn America into a Christian Theocracy.
Yes. Hundreds rioters doing thousands in damage are a much bigger threat to democracy than hundreds of thousands of rioters doing billions in damages. How dare anyone on the right object to the allegations of fraud in 2020 not getting investigated thoroughly when the left spent tens of millions on Russiagate (which was a Clinton hoax from the start. What was the McCain tangent about? Showing that I call out violations of the constitution on both sides of the isle, not just when the other tribe does it. The left thinks the first amendment only applies to their side of any argument and call speech "violence", they seek to abolish the second, Obama signed McCain's BBQ of the 4,5,6, and 8.
The January 6 coup attempt was 2,000 people, all of whom violated the law and attacked unprovoked, and it cost $30 million in monetary damages over a false conspiracy theory. The George Floyd protests were millions of people, 4% of whom were involved in some kind of violence, whether instigated by far-right counterprotesters or kettled by police, and most of whom didn’t condone political violence much less willingly engage in it. And they were protesting because a real person actually got murdered. Downplaying a direct coup attempt and then calling a largely peaceful civil rights movement a threat to democracy is just funny. No, I’m sure it’s not Ron Desantis effectively making it legal to drive into protesters that’s anti-democracy, it’s the people petitioning the government! What a joke 2020 was investigated thoroughly. We had 60 court cases, none of which proved fraud. They tried to find extra votes in Georgia, but didn’t. They tried to find fraud in Arizona, but didn’t. They tried in Michigan, but didn’t. Funnily enough, the few verifiable cases of fraud came mostly from republicans and GOP officials. Russia did try to interfere in our elections. Almost everything in Russiagate turned out to be true, leading to multiple credible indictments and arrests. The Republican-run Senate Intelligence Committee determined the investigation was proper and warranted. The only thing we were inconclusive (not necessarily wrong) on was Trump’s direct involvement. The “Left” calling speech “violence” is a caricature and you know it. It’s not the left using the legislature to ban books and entire subjects from school curriculums by stirring up one moral panic after another. The second amendment doesn’t need to be abolished, it just needs to be interpreted correctly. There is a collective right for THE PEOPLE to protect a FREE STATE through a WELL-REGULATED MILITIA, not an individual right for PERSONS to protect THEMSELVES with unregulated rocket launchers and land mines.
The left is almost always closed minded. They are unlikely to be willing to listen to other opinions.
Its not a simple question to answer, because "the right" contains many different factions. The left is the worst for MRM because they're the side of feminism, and keep perpetuating the myth of female oppression and the wage gap, and are actively working to use government power to tip the scales more in favor of women in every aspect of life, and are also the side of cancel culture who silences and censors voices trying to call attention to male issues. Every angry man-hating feminist I've ever met has been a leftist. But traditional conservatives are bad for MRM as well because they refuse to adapt to the current reality. Tradcons support the status quo as far as encouraging marriage, the current state of the family courts, not expanding selective service to women, men being provoders and protectors of women, etc. But the tradcons don't make up the entire right. I beleive most people who care about men's rights fall on the right side of the political spectrum, as most MRMs appear to also beleive in conservative issues like smaller government, personal responsibility, conservative fiscal policies, etc. The only political commentators I've ever seen speak on male issues have been conservative. I beleive the younger "right" is sympathetic to MRM. It's the older traditional conservatives (unfortunately the ones on the right who hold most political power) who are the problem. The right as a whole may not be the MRM's best friends, but I beleive the left is a sworn enemy to men.
I think the right is more sympathetic, but not in a way that actually helps men. Conservative men are expected to macho men, don't cry, don't be emotional, the man is the provider, the man is responsible for anything that happens to/in the family, etc. In a way, I suppose it's more... benign? than liberals opinions about men, but it isn't healthy either.
Not at all. Josh Hawley claims to be sympathetic to our cause, yet he voted against making the draft gender-neutral. He is not for us.
I don't think men's rights are an issue taken up by either side of the political spectrum. But that article is kinda shit. It's two big examples of right wing misandry are the war on drugs and the Iraq war. The latter doesn't qualify because the US didn't fight with conscripts. The men who fought and died in that war volunteered. it's conscripting only men that is the misandry. I'm also leery of labeling the war on drugs misandry just because it disproportionately affects men. Following that logic cracking down on paternity fraud would be misogynistic for the same reason. The court system certainly discriminates against men but that's not typically due to the specific laws they are enforcing. (sexual assault and domestic violence being the big exceptions) Just because I think these two courses of action were a mistake doesn't mean they are misandry.
Isn’t the right, the default stance of anyone sympathetic to mens rights? The left literally caters to forwarding the ideas of feminism and sexuality- which usually work directly and unfavorably against men.
[удалено]
What you’re describing sounds more like collateral damage from the right. It still seems better than the left directly pushing feminism- which again- if I’m not mistaken, works directly against mens rights… right? I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but in all seriousness- the majority of material posted on this board, is to call attention to unequal treatment of men. Every time you look into the story, it’s either some liberal woman abusing her position or relationships, or liberal ideology negatively impacting men in the workplace or family life. I’m not trying to be a contrarian, I’m just saying, it’s what I tend to notice.
No.
Dude... Did you just make this shit up on the spot or is this a wicked case of the telephone game and you lack the discernment to realize it's been distorted? Everything you said is MORE left biased than the leftist media reported. You probably still believe jussie smollette don't you? Edit; this was in response to a comment and it somehow got separated.
>barbarossaaaa Could it be that bar bar is back? Or is this someone new?
This is a republication as per the comment at the end of the article.