Jean Grey is 100x worse than Bear from Obsession spoilers
I saw a post on CMV that took a deep dive into the character of Jean Grey from the new Spiderman film and I immediately thought about all the discourse around Obsession and the hate for the character of Bear.
Bear is not a perfect character by any means. He's selfish and he benefits in certain ways from the horrible effects of the one wish willow's curse.
I have commented on other posts about how I don't consider him to be a rapist and that he is also a victim of the curse, and that has drawn extreme ire from progressives, mostly women, who see him as a pure villain. They condemn him and anyone who dares to defend his character, usually calling the people making that point misogynists, rape apologists, and even implying that anyone who defends him is likely a rapist themselves.
Rather than go into all the reasons I don't think Bear is that bad of a person, let's talk about Jean Grey from Brand New Day, a character who is very hot right now with Sadie Sink being praised for her portrayal of a revenge driven anti hero trying to rescue her sister from the clutches of an evil government agency trying to exploit mutant powers.
Jean Grey knowingly robs dozens and dozens of innocent people of their autonomy. She causes the deaths of innocents and the destruction of property on a grand scale; at one point, someone she is mind controlling walks backwards into traffic and is struck by a car (perhaps he didn't die, but he's certainly crippled for life). She makes two non consenting people kiss each other; MJ is literally mind controlled into kissing someone she doesn't love or want to kiss, and Peter is tricked into thinking he's kissing the MJ who remembers him and how she felt about him. Jean rapes them both.
Contrast that with Bear, who never intends to harm Nikki at all and is, throughout the course of Obsession, living in constant fear of "freaky" Nikki.
Jean Grey is far far worse than Bear in virtually every way.
https://redd.it/1vkmoi0
@manpill
Feminists make petitions in UK to make sure male victims never get recognised. No mra organisation has opposed any policy to include women and female victims. Why do feminists hate male victims?
https://redd.it/1vkhysf
@manpill
Why are so many men brainwashed?
I recently cut my mom and all of my female family members due to all the chaos they've brought in our family's lives with the constant smear campaigns and endless gossip. Some men in the family have also been cut off who engage in the same behavior but its mainly the women with the exception of one. I told some male friends and a random Uber driver (just making convo) about the recent cut, and they just automatically wondered why I was being so harsh to the women. They didn't even mention the men I did the same too. Long story short, are most men just brainwashed into siding with women? Why?
https://redd.it/1vk64io
@manpill
Falsely Accused: Cased Dismissed - Eight Month Fight for Freedom
I'm a Black dual-branch Marine Corps and Air Force veteran, a cybersecurity professional and a father of two daughters. Eight months ago, I was falsely accused of rape and fighting against an accuser who has done this to multiple men (per forensic evidence from her phone) for financial gain and my lawyer dubbed her a serial victim.
I was also facing a detective who said on recording that, "He will do everything in his power to counter every defense I had so when he interviews me, all I can say is I did it." My lawyer told me I was at odds because Arkansas is a broken justice system and in 2026, it may come down to "she's white" and I am "black".
I'm not going to share every detail — there's still work ahead. But I want to share what carried me through, because someone reading this might need it right now.
When I realized the system wasn't going to find the truth for me, I decided to find it myself. The police sat on exculpatory evidence from the beginning that would have led to my freedom if they would have reviewed it. Once I receive a copy of the discovery evidence, I used Claude to teach me how to use law enforcement's forensics' tool called Cellebrite, which I used to review the accuser's phone forensics.
I went through over 65,000 digital artifacts looking for what actually happened. I cross-referenced what I found against the law. I found the truth that had been sitting there the whole time.
I can't emphasize that every single piece of evidence that let to my freedom I found. Not the detectives and not even my lawyer. My lawyer admitted that I did most of the work and in kindness he waived the remaining balance of my attorney fees.
Last week on August 3rd, after eight months of emotional trauma, heartache and resiliency my case was dismissed.
What hurts the most? When the accuser was confronted with the evidence there was no emotion.....prosecutor said she just shrugged. Almost ruining a man's life, his mental health, etc. and just a fucking shrug.
Here's what I learned:
Keep fighting for the truth — even when you have to find it yourself. The system is broken and it isn't always going to do its job. Sometimes you have to become your own investigator, your own advocate, your own first line of defense. At the end of the day, no one is coming to save you.
Stay resilient — not because it feels good, but because resilience is a decision. Some days it was just getting out of bed. Some days it was calling the Veterans Crisis Line, reaching out to my therapist. Some days it was letting a friend show up instead of handling it alone.
Choose your support system wisely. I learned deeply about fair-weather friendships. Some people stayed with me until the very beginning. Others didn't, despite knowing me for years. You don't understand the pain I felt when the people that I needed support from didn't answer my calls when I was in 23/1 cell block sharing a small cell with two men on child sex and capital murder charges.
They cared more about their corporate job titles vs humanity. Despite, our kids trick-or-treating and us doing Friendsgiving's together....
I learned the difference between people who show up and people who watch from a distance.
Your past doesn't determine your future. Eight months ago, I lost jobs, opportunities, and peace of mind. I kept fighting. I was able to get a company to take a chance on me and this week will be the most emotional I will ever been as I am preparing my heartfelt resignation letter as I prepare my turn back to my old employer.
By the end of August, I will return to my corporate career, planning international travel, and building something new and most importantly...protecting my energy as a better man.
AI is not a lawyer but a useful tool for your fight: Claude taught me how to look for deleted images, files and how to get information legally ready for my attorney. It saved me months of legal limbo and there was no need for me to hire someone to look at the
actions are now filtered through the worst faith interpretations possible by those who internalize much feminist rhetoric. Many feminists turn "misogyny" into an amorphous mixture of subconscious biases that can never be observed, which allows you to call any possible act by a man misogyny and it is impossible to prove one's innocence or good intent.
Explaining something to a woman is now motivated by misogyny.
Avoiding doing so is now male fragility. Typical male avoidance of course.
Smile at a woman? You're trying to get her in bed with you.
Don't instantly assume a man's guilt in the face of an SA accusation? Misogyny! Rape culture! You think she's lying!?
Your videogames, problematic. Pretty and feminine characters set unfair standards!
Your workforce is 70% men? Better make it 50% or you're sexist, even if your applicants are also 70% male.
And of course, you're a pick-me if you're a woman who dares to be kind to men.
These complaints never benefit men, they only attack either them or women who aren't behaving inside feminist orthodoxy. They never complain about male dating standards, they never talk about male victimization of male violence, or of domestic violence affecting men. It is in fact, actively blind to those issues and feminists often knee-jerk accuse you of belittling women's problems if you bring it up. That shows that feminism isn't about gender equality, its about "equality" that only benefits women to increase women's bargaining power over men.
Not only that most of the feminist arguments you see on social media, media, and in academia are these types of arguments. These arguments influence subconscious cultural perceptions of men and women, and those three places are the places with arguably the most cultural impact. So, the harm is real. Feminism has been here for decades fighting for equality, but somehow, men and women are now more culturally apart than ever, and both are more miserable measurably.
The result: good faith advocacy becomes a shield for radicals
In the midst of third/fourth wave feminism, many men and women alike are starting to get sick of this. It is putting us at each other's throats, deliberately eroding the trust between men and women, and making us both worse off than when we started. Men and women only flourish together, a movement that only sees women's problems and suffering as valid makes us both worse off, and feminism often treats women as beyond criticism unless it is the one making the criticism.
In the 2010s onward especially, feminism has been largely culturally destructive and reprehensible. These are things it should rightfully be attacked for, however, when attacked they abandon the bailey to hide behind the Motte:
"Oh, so you hate women's rights?"
And unfortunately, this tactic is exactly what allowed feminism as a movement to maintain/increase public relevancy while growing increasingly more radical and unprincipled. Even now, many many normal and unaligned people equate attacking feminism with attacking women's rights. They associate attacking feminist ideas and impacts to hating women. A feminist doesn't even have to vocalize the Motte to hide the Bailey anymore. Men's advocates are mocked relentlessly as a result even when they have sound arguments, because they are stereotyped before they even speak to be some pathetic, angry, and spiteful man.
It works very well, and it is what the kids would call "gaslighting."
Oh, you don't like me saying all men are misogynistic? You must want to enslave women!
Yeah, its ridiculous, but a staggering amount of people fall for it. Those who don't end up afraid to push back or else they'll be painted with that brush. It's emotionally and intellectually dishonest and abusive.
You're not allowed to argue against feminism because it did good things in the past, so now in the present where a large portion of its practitioners dialogue and foot-soldiers abandoned most of it's core guiding principles, you have to let them abuse you or you're sexist. And if you complain after all that, too bad, "when
The Pro Male Collectivism discord is about to hit 300 members in it's first months of existence. Come and join us for men's rights results!
https://discord.gg/5xTyTBTAYP
https://redd.it/1vk27ie
@manpill
Male NFL players push back against media interviews in their locker rooms
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUBB7aMH2vI
https://redd.it/1vjy2wq
@manpill
driver is a lot of men treating relationships as the priority during the exact years they should've been building friendships and paying for that trade later in life, regardless of whether they end up single or married.
Curious what others think is this something you noticed in your own life? Because, I have some real life examples too. So any Guy/Men reading this understand one thing having good friend is soo much Important espically nowadays.
https://redd.it/1vjwcng
@manpill
Rethinking gender equality: why the rankings don't tell the whole story
https://cas-nor.no/news/rethinking-gender-equality-why-rankings-dont-tell-whole-story?fbclid=IwdGRjcATlPfdjbGNrBOU86XBkb2YFZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQMMzUwNjg1NTMxNzI4AAEewkpE0B1uu1y--sQop0iQv5JEFHfnLkS-_NahcqhvM5ekZJnZdH8slkY9FmY_aem_oUwMRytECyVOpDkN_VooJA
https://redd.it/1vjn4lo
@manpill
Feminists Manipulate the Definition of Feminism
While the minimal definition of feminism as the struggle for women's rights is not technically incorrect, feminists typically rely exclusively on it. They ignore the fact that a significant number of men might reasonably associate the movement with misandry, given the many women who identify as feminists while displaying such attitudes. When feminists need to defend their ideology, they cite this definition and pretend that any disagreement amounts to denying women's rights. Yet, they either turn a blind eye to the actions of other feminists—actions that cause many men to reject the movement—or they themselves display blatant hypocrisy by exhibiting misandry while framing it in a convenient light (labeling it a social issue or claiming it does not apply to everyone), whereas in a parallel scenario involving women, they would unhesitatingly label it misogyny. Even feminists who do not engage in such behavior fail to combat the radicalism within their own ideology, thereby further alienating men and preventing them from viewing the movement objectively.
Many feminists make no real attempt to render their ideology pragmatic, as it serves merely as a cover for seeking privileges and venting hatred. If they genuinely wished to defend women's rights, they would try to make their ideology acceptable to men; after all, if men—as feminists claim—hold a position of exclusive power in society and shape social attitudes toward women, then feminists ought to seek compromise with them. However, an increasing number of feminists are now moving away from this stance—thereby provoking a backlash—while retrospectively asserting that men's rejection of feminism is a clear manifestation of misogyny.
https://redd.it/1vjo93t
@manpill
Women will blame Men for everything.
https://redd.it/1vjm66s
@manpill
punishment sentences, public attention is overwhelmingly captured by cases involving women—leading to frequent state commutations or stays of execution, while hundreds of ordinary men are executed quietly without a single drop of public or media outrage.
* **The Protection Trap:** In ultra-conservative regimes like Saudi Arabia or [Pakistan](https://www.hrw.org/asia/pakistan), traditional gender roles dictate that women are the dependents and domestic responsibilities of men. Therefore, when a woman commits a standard criminal infraction (such as theft or assault), the state’s default response is frequently to view her as an easily manipulated, weak actor who was led astray, or to hand her over to her family for domestic handling, rather than throwing her into a cell. Conversely, working-class men in these nations are viewed as completely disposable actors. They are subjected to brutal, unchecked state violence, massive forced labor, and immediate imprisonment.
Whether you are in a secular Western democracy or a highly conservative religious state, the core sociological truth remains unchanged: **men are treated as completely autonomous, highly threatening, and deeply disposable agents.** In every corner of the globe, the carceral machine is designed to absorb, punish, and discard men at a scale that completely dwarfs the institutional accountability forced upon women.
6. The Classroom: Moving Past the Surface-Level Data
This systemic shield from accountability does not magically appear at age 18; it is carefully cultivated and reinforced throughout the primary and secondary education systems.
* **The Discipline Disparity:** Across public education networks, boys make up the vast majority of detentions, suspensions, and permanent exclusions/expulsions. Data from education ministries consistently shows that boys account for roughly **three-quarters of all school suspensions**.
* **The "Good Behavior" Illusion:** Just like the carceral data, it is incredibly easy for a casual observer to look at these statistics and come to the surface-level conclusion that girls are simply naturally better behaved than boys.
**But again, that is only looking at things at a surface level.**
When we look deeper at classroom dynamics, we see a massive divergence in institutional discretion. When a female student behaves badly, acts out, or breaks a rule, teachers are significantly more likely to look the other way, offer a gentle verbal warning, or give her a highly lenient punishment. Conversely, a teacher would rarely extend that same grace if a male student behaved in the exact same manner.
A boy exhibiting identical disruptive behavior is instantly pathologized. He is branded as aggressive, anti-social, or unmanageable. Instead of his behavior being treated as a developmental symptom or a cry for emotional support, he is handed a detention slip or a suspension letter. This early conditioning teaches young boys a dangerous lesson from childhood: they exist in a system of hyper-punishment where their errors are magnified, while their female peers operate within a system of corrective empathy and institutional cover.
7. The Sociological Weapon: Hyper-Agency vs. Hypo-Agency
Why is society so eager to accept a statement that is the exact opposite of the truth? The answer lies in how late-stage capitalism and neoliberal ideology view human agency through a gendered lens.
* **Male Hyper-Agency:** Society views men and boys as absolute agents. They are seen as completely detached from their environments, possessing total, unbroken control over their actions. If a working-class boy turns to crime, drops out of school, or ends up homeless, society treats it entirely as an individual, malicious choice. Because he has "hyper-agency," the only logical response is maximum punitive accountability.
* **Female Hypo-Agency:** Conversely, society views women and girls through a lens of hypo-agency—beings whose actions are primarily the result of external pressures, societal conditioning, or male influence. When a woman commits a crime or acts
Boys will be boys Held accountable for their actions just like girls are—The problem with this statement
1. Introduction: Deconstructing the Lie
In modern progressive and mainstream liberal spaces, the classic phrase *"boys will be boys"* has been rightfully discarded. In its place, a new slogan has emerged: **"Boys should be held accountable for their actions just like girls are."**
Before we look at the data, we need to correct the language surrounding this phrase. This statement does not *imply* anything. To imply means to express something indirectly. This statement is not indirect; it makes a bold, explicit, and direct assertion. It explicitly states that boys are universally excused for their bad behavior, while girls are held to a much higher standard of accountability and institutional discipline.
The core problem with this statement is simple: **it is a complete and utter inversion of reality.**
When we look past superficial internet slogans and examine the actual material data from our educational, legal, and social systems, we find the exact opposite is true. Girls are the ones who are frequently shielded from institutional accountability, while boys face an absolute surplus of punishment.
2. The Justice System: The Definitive Proof of Male Hyper-Punishment
The claim that girls are held to a higher standard completely falls apart the moment you examine the criminal justice system. The reality is that **the institutional shielding of female offenders occurs at every single stage of the legal apparatus, beginning long before a case ever reaches a courtroom.**
* **The Arrest Disparity:** Women are far less likely to be arrested entirely, even in cases where a man would face immediate arrest. Police discretion routinely favors women. For identical minor infractions, public disturbances, or domestic disputes, women are significantly more likely to be let off with a warning, a lecture, or a pass, while men are immediately handcuffed and booked into the system
* **The Likelihood of Incarceration:** If a woman *is* arrested, she remains far more likely to avoid prison time entirely. For the same crimes, women are granted plea bargains, non-custodial sentences, probation, and diversion programs at rates that dwarf their male counterparts.
* **The 60% Gender Sentencing Gap:** When incarceration is unavoidable, **the justice system regularly gives women far lower prison time than men for the exact same crime**. Landmark econometric research, most notably by Professor Sonja Starr at the University of Michigan Law School, reveals that men receive prison sentences that are, on average, **60% longer than women for the exact same offenses**. This massive disparity persists even when researchers completely control for prior criminal history, the severity of the offense, socioeconomic status, and grid variables.
1. The Surface-Level Delusion: Deconstructing the "More Men in Court" Argument
Despite these realities, most people assume that because men make up the vast majority of those who have to defend themselves in court, it automatically proves that men simply commit vastly more crime.
This brings us to a profound contradiction in mainstream progressive thought. To understand why this surface-level assumption is a trap, we must look at how we analyze other demographics within the carceral state.
Consider race in the United States: people of African American descent make up roughly 13% of the population, yet they comprise nearly 50% of the prison population. Suggesting that this statistical overrepresentation exists simply because Black people "commit more crime" or are "naturally violent" is rightfully viewed as a deeply racist statement. It is a notorious dog whistle used by the far-right to unfairly stereotype Black people as inherently aggressive, while completely ignoring centuries of systemic racism, over-policing, generational poverty, and judicial bias.
However, it is important to be fair: we cannot assume that *everyone* who looks at the raw numbers and concludes "men/Black people just commit more crime"
What are some advantages of being born male?
(despite certain disadvantages)
https://redd.it/1vj57bj
@manpill
From "Auto-Misandry" to MRA: How I escaped the feminist echo chamber and realized men are treated as disposable.
Hey everyone,
I recently saw a screenshot on r/everydaymisandry of a guy saying "I'm a man and men are horrible." It hit way too close to home and reminded me of my own past, so I wanted to share my journey here. A few years ago, I fell deep into what I can only describe as "auto-misandry"—genuine, self-directed hatred for being born male.
It started around late 2022, during the Mahsa Amini protests. Watching those events made me dive deep into online feminist spaces. On top of that, my mother always talked about women’s issues—which is fine, those exist—but men’s struggles were completely invisible to me. Over the next year and a half, I fully internalized the radical rhetoric. I started feeling actual guilt just for existing as a man. I genuinely believed that men were inherently toxic and couldn't be as good or moral as women. It completely wrecked my self-esteem and mental health.
Two main things finally snapped me out of that echo chamber:
First, the blatant double standards. I started noticing how casually women online would body-shame men over height and other unchangeable physical traits, with zero pushback. It clicked for me that toxicity isn't gendered. Women are just as capable of toxic behavior as men; they just get a pass for it. After that realization, I checked out of politics entirely for over a year.
The real turning point happened in late 2025 with the renewed debates about conscription and military service here in Europe. Watching society casually discuss sending young men to the front lines as cannon fodder—while completely ignoring our rights and safety—was a massive wake-up call. It made me realize how disposable men still are to institutional power. We aren't the ones with all the privilege; we are treated as expendable. I started to get interested in subreddits about men's issues in late 2025.
That’s when I became an MRA. Men deserve empathy, advocacy, and a voice without being the automatic scapegoat for every problem in the world.
If any guys reading this are stuck in that phase of self-blame: please step away from those toxic spaces. You are not responsible for the actions of other men, and you don't owe anyone an apology for being born male.
Thanks for reading.
https://redd.it/1vj4ubd
@manpill
Feminists make petitions in UK to make sure male victims never get recognised. No mra organisation has opposed any policy to include women and female victims. Why do feminists hate male victims?
https://redd.it/1vki5kw
@manpill
Ex-Wife Tries To Flirt Her Way Back
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/CFfCXAv5Okk
https://redd.it/1vkbax1
@manpill
forensics for me. I formatted everything I found in an easy-to-read way for the lawyer to interpret and he handle the legal conversation with the prosecutor.
If you're in the middle of something that feels unsurvivable right now — keep going.
The truth matters. Your life matters. Keep fighting for both.
Semper Fi.
https://redd.it/1vk54h1
@manpill
accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression." Your entire perspective is invalid simply due to your gender, and your voice is taken from you.
It's tiresome and right now feminists are some of the worst obstacles to gender equality and neutral gender advocacy. The gender war would not exist if feminism actually upheld its principles and acted as an egalitarian movement. The results will continue to not only hurt men, but women as well.
The only solution is to drive this home until the common person understands it:
Feminism =/= Women's Rights
And it would help if feminists strongly gatekept man-hating out of their movement. The people parroting the misandry should be associated with insanity, bigotry, and sexism, not a respected social movement that gives them unearned legitimacy and defense by default and normalizes their rhetoric. The way feminism is now, even well intentioned feminists are unwittingly acting as the Motte for radical misandrists who use them as a shield. The misandrists either need to be kicked out, or the principled feminists should jump ship to Egalitarianism entirely so the misandrists lose their leverage over the culture.
https://redd.it/1vk51c9
@manpill
Feminism functions as a massive Motte and Bailey
​
Feminism is a large decentralized social movement made of people with different, often contradictory ideas. It claims to be a movement for gender equality, and sure for some feminists they genuinely act under those principles, but I would say that from a wholistic view in the modern day feminism acts more as a movement for female advocacy (which it doesn't even do consistently) often lurching into female supremacy.
This IS a Motte and Bailey. The Motte is a highly defensible argument you'd seem absurd for arguing against, and the Bailey is a much shakier more indefensible argument that hides behind the Motte. By hiding behind the Motte when your Bailey is attacked, you can avoid refutation and normalize the Bailey by making your enemies seem unreasonable. This is a force for radicalization, both inside your group, for your enemies, and for people unassociated with all of it as the Bailey's arguments slowly become the new norm and acceptable to say.
And so, there's two main sections of the feminist movement.
Motte:
The Motte is simple. "Men and Women should be treated equally!" Now, if that's all it takes to be a feminist, if that's all there is to it, sign me up. That is a simple and fair universal principle, and a movement based on that sounds great. Many good things were done with this aspect of feminism I don't want to take away from. It gave women the vote and financial independence.
However, in present day that has become a much lesser part of the conversation, and this aspect of feminism has become it's shield.
The complicated reality lies in the Bailey.
Bailey:
The Bailey is dirtier and more complicated, almost insurgent. There are many arguments that act as Feminism's Bailey, most of which are broad sweeping and dehumanizing generalizations:
* Men universally oppress women and every man is privileged as a result
* Men socially oppress women as well through toxic dominance dynamics
* Men are intrinsically misogynist and objectify women, seeing them as breeding stock
* Masculinity is toxic
* Rape culture
* Domestic Violence is a gendered issue, men don't get abused. And if they did, it isn't that bad!
* "Men are literally killing us! Stop killing us!"
* If a man ever dislikes a woman it is due to misogyny or male fragility
* Men are unfeeling sociopaths
* Advocating for men hurts women and distracts from their REAL problems
* Our culture socializes everyone to be misogynist
* Women are victims of male violence
* If you don't instantly believe SA allegations with no evidence you're sexist
* Wars are created by men and would not exist under female leaders
* As a result women don't need to be grateful for male soldiers defending them
* Women are better leaders due to higher emotional intelligence and empathy
* Workplace demographics are indicators of female oppression
* Pro-life arguments enforce gender inequality
* You have internalized misogyny if you want to be a house-wife or love your husband
* Marriage is oppressive, childrearing even more-so
* And ALL men are at fault for all of the above. Yes, individual men.
Now all of these arguments have something wrong with them or are maliciously incomplete, making them highly objectionable. And these generalizations don't even stop with men, they target women who don't fall in line, so feminism isn't even supportive to all women. But do men universally oppress women? I don't. That's laughable. Are women victims of male violence? Sure, but so are men at a rate 3-4x more in some cases, leaving that out gives wildly incorrect framing. Also queens were 27-39% more aggressive, so the claim war is a male invention is literally wrong for example.
But they run with these arguments that lead to fairly ridiculous outcomes. Men have been repeatedly dehumanized due to these ideas for doing basically anything. They are now viewed with inherent suspicion and guilt that was not present before, giving empathy to men is even more foreign than it used to be, and all their
The role of alcohol in false rape allegations is very poorly understood
The role of alcohol in false rape allegations should be more broadly discussed and more fully explained by professionals so that people are aware of one of the dangers of excessive drinking.
Firstly, alcohol has the effect of causing myopia - your view narrows so that what is right in front of you dominates your thinking and desires. For example, we do things we would not normally do (fight for no good reason, have sex with someone we would not normally want to have sex with, drink-drive).
Secondly, the effect of this myopia is compounded by the fact that at high level BAC all people start to suffer alcoholic blackout. Contrary to what most people believe, this has nothing to do with actually blacking out (losing consciousness). It means your brain stops making new memories. You may be fully aware of what you are doing - walking, talking, driving, having sex - but you cannot later remember what you did.
The result is that when a person has sex while drunk, albeit entirely consensual, he or she will often not remember it, or significant parts of it. In the sobering light of day, it is not surprising that some people will look at the facts (had sex with x) and deduce that "I don't remember, but x is not attractive to me, so I would not have consented to sex with x".
Unfortunately, some of these people will allege that they have been raped. (And this is actively encouraged by some extreme feminists, who push the utterly false narrative that "I cannot remember, therefore I could not have consented".) In many of these cases, the alleged victim may well believe that they have been raped, despite the fact that they have no recollection.
The takeaway is: If you get very drunk you will probably do things that your sensible self would not, AND you will not remember.
https://redd.it/1vk26um
@manpill
Women on TikTok defending Lindsay Clancy in any way possible, trying to frame her Husband despite the boundless amounts of evidence against her.
https://redd.it/1vjyn2q
@manpill
What is the real reason of male loneliness?
(https://www.reddit.com/r/AskIndianMen/)(https://www.reddit.com/r/AskIndianMen/)(https://www.reddit.com/r/AskIndianMen/?f=flairname%3A%22Answers%20from%20All%20%3Asnoosimplesmile%3A%3Asnoothoughtful%3A%22)
We keep saying men are "lonelier" than women. The data says something more specific — and more useful. Every few months this discourse resurfaces: men are lonely, men have no friends, blame feminism/dating apps/whatever. Let's actually look at what's measured before drawing conclusions.
The self-report numbers are basically equal. Pew Research (2025): 16% of men vs 15% of women report feeling lonely or isolated "all or most of the time." A 1% gap not statistically meaningful. Broader compiled data (American Institute for Boys and Men, Aug 2025) puts it at 20% men vs 21% women feeling lonely frequently. If you only look at "who says they're lonely," there's no epidemic that's specifically male.
So why does this keep getting framed as a male problem? Because the shape of the isolation is different, even if the rate isn't:
20% of single men report zero close friends 74% of men say they'd turn to a spouse/partner FIRST for emotional support before friends or family Men cope by withdrawing; women cope by reaching out to their existing network That's not "men feel it more." That's "men have fewer backup systems when it hits nowadays."
Here's the part that actually matters: the self-report numbers might be lying to us anyway. Multiple researchers flag that men are less likely to admit loneliness at all because admitting it is the vulnerable act men are trained to avoid. So a man scoring "not lonely" on a survey might just be a man who wasn't going to check that box regardless of how he actually feels.
This isn't proven with hard data, it's an inference but it's a reasonable one, because it lines up with everything else: men have fewer friends, disclose less, but somehow report feeling the same as women. Something doesn't add up, and underreporting is the most obvious explanation.
And before anyone says "well women don't hide anything" they do, just differently. There's a documented pattern of women masking loneliness through performed independence the "I don't need anyone, I have options, I'm thriving" posture rather than open loneliness. Different mask, same function: protect against looking vulnerable or undesirable. Men hide behind stoicism, women (per this research, though it's less studied than the male pattern) sometimes hide behind a narrative of choice and abundance. Neither is "fake" loneliness it's loneliness wearing whatever costume its culture rewards.
Now here's my actual theory on WHY men specifically end up with fewer friends: I don't think it's about being single. I think it's about chasing relationships too early.
Research on adolescent development backs this up in a specific way: teenagers in romantic relationships are less likely to form NEW friendships during exactly the years (early-mid teens) when friend groups are normally built and cemented. Romantic involvement doesn't kill existing friendships, but it blocks new ones from forming and if you're spending your early-mid teens chasing a relationship instead of building a friend group (thanks in part to social media FOMO making "being in a relationship" feel like a status requirement), you miss the window where guys typically build the friendships that carry them into adulthood.
This isn't male-exclusive as a mechanism it should affect anyone who does it. But I think it hits men harder downstream because men have fewer backup systems (see above: 74% rely on a partner first, most don't rebuild a friend network later). So a guy who prioritized chasing girls over building friends at 14-16 doesn't have women's fallback of leaning on an existing friend network when things go wrong later he often has neither the relationship nor the friends.
So my actual claim: the "male loneliness epidemic" conversation obsesses over men not being able to get partners. I think that's backwards. The bigger
Spotify doesn't do anything when I report misandrist content
On Spotify, there's playlists named stuff like "I hate men era" or "all men suck" or "men are stupid and I don't respect them". I have reported these for hate multiple times, but they've never been removed. I recently saw an audiobook on Spotify called "I hate men" and the description was a woman saying something along the lines of "as women we always say we don't hate men. But what if that's the only way out of the patriarchy?" I report it, and still, nothing has been done about it. Spotify doesn't even respond to my reports to tell me why they didn't do anything.
https://redd.it/1vjrqap
@manpill
I keep seeing tiktoks of " I refuse to have a son I will get an abortion if its a boy" and it makes me so angry as a woman myself.
As a woman, I see tiktoks all the time of women saying with no shame whatsoever, " If i get pregnant and I find out it's a boy, I'm having an abortion,
What the fuck.
I hope to have children one day, and I genuinely don't have a preference on gender at all. I'll love my child regardless, and in my opinion, that's how it should be, but aparantly not?
I also see:
" My worst fear is having only boys."
And people agree with them?!
If someone said
" My worst fear is having only girls."
There would be an outrage.
I'm sick of the man hating extravaganza and if I have a son in the future I'll genuinely be scared for him.
https://redd.it/1vjn6yp
@manpill
harmfully, the discourse immediately shifts to the external factors that *forced* her to do it. Consequently, she is rarely held fully accountable because she is seen as lacking total agency.
This is the ultimate neoliberal trap. By framing boys as completely autonomous actors who just need more "accountability," mainstream discourse shields the state from its failure to fund public schools, protect working-class communities, and provide robust social safety nets.
8. The Root Cause: The Cradle-to-Grave Empathy Gap
Now that we have analyzed the raw material realities—from childhood classrooms to global carceral systems—we have to ask the ultimate question: *Why does this happen?* What is the underlying engine driving this massive systemic disparity across different eras, nations, and institutions?
The explanation is simple: **human beings possess a deep, inherent reservoir of sympathy for women and girls that is routinely denied to men and boys.**
In social psychology, this phenomenon is documented as the [**"Women-Are-Wonderful" Effect**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women-are-wonderful_effect). Across cultures, individuals implicitly and explicitly associate positive, warm, and non-threatening attributes with the global category of women, while viewing men with a baseline of suspicion, utility, or detachment.
This is not a learned political bias; it is an instinct that begins in literal infancy. A devastating proof of this reality can be found in the landmark [**1976 study by Condry & Condry**](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20923057/) (*"Sex Differences: A Study of the Eye of the Beholder"*), which laid bare how deeply wired this bias truly is.
In the experiment, adults were shown a videotape of an infant crying intensely in reaction to a jack-in-the-box. The baby’s actual gender was entirely ambiguous. Half of the participants were told they were looking at a baby girl, while the other half were told they were looking at a baby boy.
The results were chilling:
* Those who believed they were looking at a **baby girl** viewed her cries as a **call for help, interpreting her distress as fear or vulnerability**.
* Those who believed they were looking at a **baby boy** viewed his identical cries as **aggression or anger**.
This study explains everything. It proves that from literal infancy, a male’s distress or vulnerability is perceived not as a cry for assistance, but as a potential threat or a display of hostility. This fundamental empathy gap explains why, as these babies grow into children and adults, females are punished far more leniently than males even when their behavior is completely identical. A girl's misbehavior is viewed through the lens of internal suffering requiring protection; a boy's misbehavior is viewed through the lens of external danger requiring suppression.
9. Conclusion: Reclaiming the Truth
We do not advocate for a world of zero accountability. We advocate for a world where boys are granted the same floor of institutional empathy, structural understanding, and restorative justice that is already automatically extended to girls.
We must reject the punitive, inverted rhetoric of mainstream liberalism and demand a materialist approach to justice—one that replaces systemic cruelty with genuine social solidarity.
https://redd.it/1vj4lh8
@manpill
is explicitly malicious or deeply prejudiced. On paper, when looking at things strictly at a surface level, that seems like a logical conclusion to draw.
**But that is only when you look at things at a surface level.**
As leftists, we are supposed to reject surface-level capitalist narratives. We know that raw arrest and incarceration data do not measure "inherent criminality." Instead, they measure:
* Which communities are heavily targeted by the state and over-policed.
* Which groups are denied economic security, forcing them into survival-based or underground economies.
* Which demographics face a total "empathy gap" from police, judges, and juries, leading to higher arrest rates and fewer warnings.
To apply a deep, materialist, socio-economic analysis to race, but then completely abandon that analysis when it comes to gender—reverting to the right-wing logic of "well, the numbers say they just commit more crime"—is intellectual dishonesty.
4. The Intersection of Bias: Race, Gender, and the Brian Banks Case
When we look beneath the surface, we see how the systemic biases of race and gender run on identical parallel tracks within the state apparatus.
We know that Black people receive far more prison time than white people for the exact same crime, and they are far less likely to be believed innocent—especially if their accuser is a white person.
A devastating and vital example of this is the case of **Brian Banks**. Banks was a high school football star with a promising future who was falsely accused of rape. Because of his race and his gender, the system instantly stripped him of the presumption of innocence. Faced with a biased legal structure and the threat of a massive prison sentence, he was coerced into a plea deal and spent years in prison for a crime that never happened, before later being completely exonerated.
The exact same structural dynamic applies to gender. Men are far more likely to be arrested, receive significantly higher prison time than women for the same crime, and are far less likely to be believed or given due process if their accuser is female.
In fact, criminological models evaluating these systemic disparities show a staggering reality: **if men were treated with the exact same institutional leniency as women at every single stage of the justice system—from arrest discretion to plea bargaining and sentencing—at least 70% of current male prisoners would have never seen a single day inside a jail cell.**
Idolizing the justice system as a perfectly neutral machine that only punishes the guilty allows institutional prejudice to thrive. The state routinely uses its power to crush vulnerable demographics—particularly minority and working-class men—while mainstream liberals clap along under the false impression that "accountability" is being served.
5. A Global Phenomenon: Deconstructing the "Western Outlier" Myth
At this stage of the argument, mainstream liberal critics will often attempt to move the goalposts. They will claim that this institutional leniency toward women and hyper-punishment of men is strictly a Western, modern anomaly—the product of contemporary family courts or progressive reforms.
But this is completely false. **The reality of women being treated far more leniently than men by the state apparatus is a near-universal constant across almost every nation on earth. This remains true even in nations deeply associated with institutional women's oppression, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan.**
To understand why, we have to look at the deeply entrenched, patriarchal structures of these societies. While these states explicitly restrict women’s civil liberties, bodily autonomy, and public life, their *criminal justice systems* simultaneously view women through a lens of absolute "hypo-agency" and domestication:
* **The Incarceration Gap in the Global South:** In the [Islamic Republic of Iran](https://iranhr.net/), the prison population is overwhelmingly male. When human rights groups, defense lawyers, and local activists launch high-profile campaigns to stop capital
UK: British army’s links to men-only clubs under review.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/army-s-links-to-men-only-clubs-under-review/ar-AA29FnJh?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=6a779ba18a8149a1aaee2e3676893eed&ei=10
https://redd.it/1vj7c3q
@manpill
We shouldn't forget that Feminist Men are a huge obstacle to Men's Rights
I think a lot of MRAs fail to completely realise that feminist men make up a significant portion of the feminist movement and are often even worse than female feminists. I often see takes on here and in other MRA spaces that blame everything on women when feminist men are completely culpable in the oppression of men and female anti-feminists are significant contributors to Men's Rights.
I would argue that they are often some of the worst types of feminists since feminist cis-women never had to experience what it's like being a man (or growing up as a boy) and some of them may genuinely be ignorant to a lot of it whereas most feminist men are fully aware that women are the priviliged sex in most areas of society and they chose to pander to the feminist narrative anyway, often for social acceptance or in an attempt to secure relationships with women.
I think many feminist men also don't realise that they are inevitably going to hurt many women with this, especially young women who may not be fully aware of all the actual facts and may end up loathing themselves and hating their own body because of the lies, so if feminist men truly cared about women they would just admit the truth and say that women are the priviliged sex, especially in conversations with their daughters or other close relatives.
And to be clear I'm not saying this to absolve feminist women of any responsibility for the oppression of men and I fully understand that many of them are the malicious types who know what they're doing and they don't want to change the fact that they're benefiting from the oppression, I just want to point out that feminist men often don't get mentioned as much as they should be.
https://redd.it/1vj69fn
@manpill
The Taliban’s war on education: ‘Nobody talks about what is happening to the boys’ | Taliban
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2026/jul/13/afghanistan-education-taliban-universities-teaching-students-religion-women-islam
https://redd.it/1vj1tv2
@manpill
