I want to support this. I do support this. I believe the declarations.

I don't believe in a world where there is no advocacy for men, who are the human shields for these women, who are the cannon fodder, who are dying in the fields, hopefully a quick death.

Where is the advocacy for them?

Who is advocating for these guys on the frontline?

Or these guys who are trying to support society by living a normal life, next to women?

They are too busy taking care of animal welfare. Don't get me wrong, this is important too, but not more important than boys and men.

I think most people in this sub from the USA and i rarely see European example hear, but i want to know the state of mens rights and feminist in europe.

If you had experince please share with me.

Thanks for the answers!

Recently I heard about a hazing incident that involved assaulting a boy with a broomstick. I was thinking that's rape, even by the CDC definition. Why aren't they saying he was raped? What does it take for the media to say a male was "raped"?

Well, I did a Google search and the first incident I came across was from 2016. What was so bizarre about this incident was, not only was it not referred to as "rape", by the media, but the perpetrators were not even charged with any kind of sexual offense, not even sexual assault.

Because, get this, "They will not face sexual assault charges because the law requires a motive of sexual gratification, which was not the case here, Hogan said."

This has got to be among the most f&%ked up things I have ever heard. Then that means if they penetrated a girl with a broomstick, that's not a sexual offense either, right? I mean unless the broomstick experienced sexual gratification, it's not sexual assault, right? LMAO (And did it not occur to those dimwitted law enforcers that it's possible some of his assistants might be gay??)

https://6abc.com/post/da-3-conestoga-football-players-charged-for-assault-with-broomstick/1230847/

Earlier today I was out and about and noticed the athletic club not far from my apartment complex (the Las Vegas Athletic Club, for anyone wondering) openly advertised on the electronic billboard outside the building how it has women-only groups. I mean, WTF, how is this not blatant misandry and anti-male exclusion and discrimination? So much for misandry not being real when we see so many examples of it in action like this. If it's "women-only" to provide a safe space then it's only fair men get them too because we too can be and are also vulnerable to being harassed or preyed on by predatory people (women and other men alike), but as always, this is always ignored and dismissed and treated as a non-issue.

Not the first time I've seen the LVAC openly promote misandry either, I recall there was a time they also had a "ladies join free" promotion, and they may still have it. I know this is one organization I won't support, they won't get one red cent from me when they openly promote misandry like this. I'd feel the same way about a place promoting a men-only group as well, in my book any kind of misandrist or misogynistic bigotry and exclusion of this sort is equally unacceptable and intolerance.

feel like there needs to be male infleunce in the culture and it needs to seriously deal with male issues in a way it has not in a long time basically and this post is a bit concept oriented but i feel it is important.

Seems like any time I walk through a bus stop nowadays, this is a constant theme I see. People standing as far as away from each other. Especially women away from men. As if they're terrified that the man will suddenly turn into a sex-hungry animal at any moment lol.

Has it always been like this? I don't remember it being like this in the 90's. My Grandad used to openly chat up any girl standing at a bus stop. And they weren't uncomfortable with it either, they just saw him as a "sweet old man". I think today, it would be a very different reaction.

will say while she does not outright say the logical thing and that is outlaw this mentally ill and horrid trash but she does admit it is basically equvivalnt to female genital mutilation and is why as hypocritcal and illogical as this maga nation is if there exists even the least bit of logic either it will eventually be outlawed or female circumcision will have to be basically legalized because there is no logical in between point and i struggle and will continue to push things further in that logical direction.

As early voting already started and Election Day is like a week away it’s important that you put in the time to fill that ballot to vote. I don’t care what your political beliefs are or what side of the political spectrum you are all that is important is that you vote.

Your vote is arguably your most powerful weapon, we made democrats bleed 20 million trying to figure out why men bailed on them. More and more articles are being put out asking, “what do we do with the men’s vote?”

I’m not gonna tell you who exactly you should vote for, I’m just telling you to just go out and vote. Vote for whoever you best believe will help men no matter if they’re democrat, republican, independent, libertarian, green etc. Just go fill out that ballot.

Remember society ignores men because we’re expected to just take it and do nothing about it but I don’t want that happening anymore.

Note: That this is just for those who live in America if you live outside the U.S I don’t know how your elections work or when they are so please do your own individual research.

I was almost about to give it a like, and then read the whole post.

For context, Beti means 'daughter' and Beta means 'son' in Hindi, and "Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao" means "Save Daughter, Educate Daughter," which is a slogan of a campaign focusing on girls's education in India. It seems, that recently a High Court judge from the Indian state Patna has did a rhetorical twist on it and used it for boys.

It felt like a good principle on the surface, until I read the whole caption and the LinkedIn post.

All on the comments were only agreeing with phrases like "well said" and "finally someone." Hence, I joined the group only to comment, and then left.

These cases often fly under mainstream media reporting narratives. Women often throw around the narrative that "no woman is a rapist" because rape is legally defined as penetration. More social exposure to convicted female predators will also increase the likelihood of men and boys coming forward and reporting their own abuse to authorities.

Credit to original OP. They often talk on how Tate and co are bad influence and boys should learn to be proper. But male teachers are discriminated against making the job unpopular for men. I believe men are equally capable of nurturing as much as any women out there.

I believe the issue of ending conscription should be an issue where feminist backlash is the most minimal for men's issue in general. But we seem to really face challange with this issue.
My own experience isn't that much, with most people I give this question to hasn't really thought about it.
Most just resort to "what if the country needs to defend itself and lack soldiers" thing, but not much answers when I press them on why women aren's also conscripted if the issue is lack of personnel.

The war in Ukraine and the policy of conscription of men but not women is a very blatant display of this norm being encouraged by supposedly "egalitarian" western societies(I am not talking about Ukraine itself specifically, but western countries in general and their attitudes of condoning Ukraine's conscription practice).
Curious on your experience. I feel one don't need to appear to be MRA just to question people regarding this norm. The gender discrimination is very blatant.

In Australia we just had a man appointed by government as board chairman of a wholesale fruit and vegetable market regulator. He replaced a woman who was the acting board chair.

So what happens next? All the women on the board resign in protest! Now it might have been that the man was not qualified; but no, he had previously been head of the biggest produce retail market in Australia.

We have reached the point that qualified male appointees to senior positions are now unacceptable to feminist ideologues. Where will this end?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-10-26/melbourne-demons-boss-named-as-melbourne-market-chair/107300542

What blows my mind is that, before she moved to France and changed her mind, she said she would actually argue with her husband to get their son circumcised. That is the part that is completely alien to me. It is not just that I disagree with circumcision. I genuinely cannot understand caring that much about doing it.

Even if I hated foreskins, even if I preferred circumcised penises, even if I was perfectly happy with being circumcised myself, I still cannot imagine arguing with my wife to cut healthy tissue off our child. Why would I care that much? Why would I be fighting for that outcome rather than just leaving the kid alone?

And this was not even a religious issue for her. So what exactly was the motivation? You are seriously going to push for a permanent medical procedure on your own child because that is what you're used to seeing? That mindset is so foreign to me that I have trouble relating to it at all.

Then later she changes her mind, admits there is harm involved, compares it to female genital mutilation, acknowledges many of the points critics have been making for years, and suddenly realizes that maybe cutting healthy tissue off children is not such a great idea after all.

But then she still turns around and says parents should basically be allowed to do whatever they want. That is where she loses me completely. If you genuinely think it is harmful, and if you are willing to compare it to genital cutting performed on girls, then what is the point of spending an entire video making those arguments only to retreat into "but parents can decide"?

If somebody made a video about a form of genital cutting done to girls, compared it to female genital mutilation, talked about the harms involved, and then concluded with "but parents should be free to do it anyway," people would think that was absurd. Yet somehow when the discussion involves boys, people are expected to take that contradiction seriously.

The whole thing just makes me think that a lot of people's opinions on circumcision are driven more by culture and social expectations than by logic. She moves to France, where circumcision is much less common, and suddenly starts questioning assumptions that apparently never occurred to her before. It is as if surrounding norms changed and only then did the basic ethical questions become obvious.

What I cannot get over is not that she changed her mind. Changing your mind is fine. What I cannot understand is how she was ever passionate enough about circumcision to argue for it in the first place. Even if I thought circumcision was harmless, I still cannot imagine feeling strongly enough to campaign for the removal of healthy tissue from my own child. That level of enthusiasm for it is something I honestly cannot relate to at all.

Hi from Argentina, irmãos brasileiros. I was watching the news, and Lula was reelected.

I read many times that Brazil has a misandry problem, apart that PT (ruling party) is pushing antimale policies, and now with 4 years more will persist.

Will it be a worsening or the start of feminism being confronted?

The boy and the dad are presented as helpless idiots. The mom is going to her super job, while dad doesn't know how to make french toast. The boy is somehow gross.

Just like the Peppa Pig Cartoons, but in a version for adults. It's the cultural norm now I guess....

Disclaimer, this is not an endorsement on Asmongold, let's not make it about him.

Honest question, interested in exchange in good faith. How did this kind of content became normalized? It's delusional. These women make all these statements contrary to actual facts and nonetheless, this is considered passable. How? Why? When?

Here is a quote from the clip:

I am not saying you don't have to deal with stuff and I know you are not doing great. Look at suicide rates. But they don't have to deal with what we deal with. They don't have to laugh with jokes that aren't funny.

Again, for me the problem is not that there is a platform for these things. There is always going to be extremists and idiots and they will always be finding a way to make their ideas public. I am focusing on the fact, that this type of nonsensical thinking is societally accepted right now.

PS: As always, YouTube-Comments do not fail to deliver.

Parenthood law is inconsistent. A woman can decide whether to become a parent within a set window, but a man has no equivalent choice. If the state says a child's claim to support outweighs a parent's choice, it must apply to both parents. If it doesn't, it shouldn't apply to just one. So, which is it? If the concern is the child's welfare, the answer is to fund support some other way, not to make one parent liable by default.

I know the bodily autonomy argument for abortion. It’s valid, but it covers autonomy and not the bill. Our current system is a double standard.

Hey, so for starts I’m 29. I struggle with pelvic floor pain, and recently went to a urologist to get my prostate checked. My PT told me to do so, because my symptoms can line up with prostatitis and prostate cancer. So they often have you screened for it. I asked for this to be done but my doctor was a female, i think she was uncomfortable doing it, and used my age as a reason to not do it despite the health issues iv been having. She instead prescribed a new pill that i wont be taking due to the side effects actually making things worse for me.

I don’t really know what to do from here, i told my PT that i tried and was refused that care. So maybe she can point mr to a doctor that will.

Have you ever had health issues and be refused care based on your gender?

Be the way i do know its normally 40-50 people get prostate exam for cancer, but iv been having health issues and was told by my pelvic pt to have it done, because shes had people come back with prostatitis, and one time prostate cancer.