I mean... Feminism literally wants men dead. Does #KillAllMen ring a bell? Anyway, here's some source material since I suppose You would never believe me on my word alone:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/rQv8VuLpKN4https://www.youtube.com/embed/qVKvEaokV6Ihttps://www.youtube.com/embed/F60jvY2D26Ihttps://www.youtube.com/embed/YOZ5ZwhduXUAnd that's just Shoe0nHead, and just the biggest hits. If You want more (though, admittedly, those tend to be a bit of an overreaction), You can also look up Christine Grace Smith:
Christine Grace Smith on YouTube
Therefore, since the feminists literally want us men dead, it would be logical for us to want them all dead as well. Unlike them, though, we are just avoiding them best we can. Except the few and far between E. R. cultists, I guess. But, You know, that's simply what happens when You hate on someone too much for too long.
And yeah, it's kind of ironic that the one compiling all this evidence against feminism is a woman. A sane woman, but still a woman.
As a woman being an ex-feminist (healed from this nonsense after a good 8 months of mainstream media rehab), I will tell you the reason why women want men eliminated (because I had this mindset as well).
Because no matter how much we get repeated and bombarded by feminism and equality: history, biology and reality providing us a nicest dish buffet (patriarchy, contributions, any kind of sports, even reproduction etc.) that hurts us the most, realizing that what we are told throughout the media is nothing but a false promise:
MEN ARE BETTER THAN WOMEN. Men excel more in most things than we can do, in average. We have no choice but to accept reality and biology because we just cannot change it the way we want. So it is because of our malicious envy and resentment towards masculinity being primary gender. Hence why feminists love to 'eliminate men' in order to reach the top.
Why do you think women are so obsessed with being equal to men and say things like 'we can do everything what men can do'?
It is so sad how dense most of you men can be. It all stems to one root reason of modern women's unreasonable hatred towards men: ENVY
I swear you blokes can be so dense XD I do not mind knowing men are better than us. That does not make use women useless. That is something what those evil narrative trying to say to us to make us feel bad and to escape nature.
@melssvdv Now that's interesting. I think there is a lot of manipulation/self-deprecation in this "men are better than women" claim. Men might be stronger and smarter than women on average, but women alone hold the power to bring new life (including new men) into this world. We simply cannot survive without cooperating with each other. So... Someone must be manipulating this from behind the scenes if we are being coerced into hating each other!
@melssvdv It does, but women are the ones who carry most of the weight of this process. A man cannot give birth to a child (as much as certain "T from LGBT" activists would want You to believe otherwise), and in this sense women control the society's demographics. Sure, men could find ways to force women into giving birth, but I feel like it would be much better if both sexes made sense and willingly cooperated on sustaining the society.
And judging by women like You, Miss Shoe0nHead and the female VTubers She kind of brought to my attention, we might might be on the verge of a breaktrough within our society that will see women become capable of making decisions based mostly on rational thought, even if they are still more emotional than men. If we could get it, I believe we will enter a new age of prosperity as human race, maybe we could even seriously start with this outer space exploration thing (demographics will be key in any space mission that is supposed to last hundreds of years 😀).
You said 'power to bring new life '
But men have this as well you know. Even better though because a man can beget more children to existence after 9 months after impregnating couple of women. No matter how efficient and easy it is for the man, the cells of the child is 50 percent of the father's. That is some real power
Gestating a baby out of your vagina is really the opposite of 'power'. It is not a power, stop romanticizing please.
And 'bring life' is a really abstract term. 'but women are the ones who carry most of the weight of this process' does not really correlate to 'bring life'. They really do not sound synonymous. The life is already there made by a man and woman. Carrying and pushing it out does not equal to 'bring life'.
The problem is that just because we got the short end of the stick, people tend to romanticize and put some symbolism into the process to such an extent it does not really correlate to reality and biology whatsoever.
Life is brought by both half of total gametes of man and woman. That is the truth.
@melssvdv It's not romanticizing, definitely not in the times of "pro-choice" movements. Every woman choosing to actually give birth (or simply to be a sane, good woman) means a lot for the society, and therefore I believe it should be complimented (if for nothing else than simply counteracting the feminist "girlboss" brainwashing).
I have to agree with the part about men being able to impregnate multiple women, at least in a purely biological setting. I guess I'd have to take my word back on women alone having the power to bring new life into the world. It might get even worse with those new AI-powered robots with artificial wombs the Chinese are apparently designing. At any rate, women alone can give birth (at least for now, since those Chinese robots might make a dent in this monopoly), which means they are still crucial for the society's survival.
"Every woman choosing to actually give birth "
What do you mean with 'choose'? It takes a man's permission as well. If a man is not satisfied (no sperm), then there would be no child whatsoever. Childbirth comes by itself after mutual agreement of man and woman and especially if the fertilization occurs. That 'woman choose' is a completely oversimplified term that is not true.
@melssvdv It does take two to make a child. It's just... Women tend to be emotional, and I guess I am kind of trying to forge a narrative that would make them feel valued in a men-led world. Also, I am not romanticizing giving birth. I am simply commending/applauding women who wish to give birth, since they are not easy to come across these days and I feel like we might have to "advertise" being a mother somewhat to reverse this trend. I'm not even referring to giving birth as some metaphysical experience, I just state the fact that it is necessary for the humanity's survival.
“Women tend to be emotional, and I guess I am kind of trying to forge a narrative that would make them feel valued in a men-led world.”
This means you are romanticizing. If you were telling the objective truth, you would not say anything about “women having the power to bring life” and all that fluff, since it takes two to make one. Power belongs to two.
I do not need to be romanticized. I know that God made me the way I am, and therefore I am who I am. The most important thing is to do good for my family and those close to me. Romanticizing me—or other women—does nothing good, because words will never change biology.
In fact, this kind of romanticizing only makes ignorant women even more ignorant. Saying nonsense like women “create life” on their own is often used by so-called Red Pillers who want to “put women in their feminine place,” so they romanticize womanhood to make women think, “Oh, that sounds good to me; I guess I’ll stay feminine.”
But in reality, this is still romanticizing. It gives women a false sense of entitlement, makes them spoiled, and can even lead them to view men as inferior. Romanticizing elevates people beyond what they naturally and biologically are.
There is nothing wrong that God has put one above the other. That is nature's order. Equality is just sensationalism asking for destruction.
Stop romanticizing.
Let's put it this way. Trudeau had groping allegations in the past, has elbowed a woman he hated into the breast, and his secretary who is a woman called him hostile behind the scenes.
You should know from experience, that many gay people steal women's roles as a means to rebel against women. These gay useless feminists like trudeau are smearing any real accomplishments that brave feminist women had in the past (e. g. reducing domestic violence). ㅤ
Which malaka said feminism wants men dead? Come on...
FEMINISM is just a movement initiated to help women gain financial equilibrium in an era where the men were all running off to war and gals were being short-changed by factory owners etc. in terms of wages "because they're weaker than men"... Read a fucking book...
FEMINISM IS NOT (1) justification for women to want to "become" men, (2) a call to kill off male energy or libido or anything else, (3) any sort of hatred of half the planet. Losers who believe this are probably the ones who use hospital gloves as blow-up turkeys...
PLEASE... GET... A CLUE.
Oh, @DishLady, long time no see! Since it's You, let's have a respecful debate. I brought in my receipts on feminism in my own answer, and I'm not sure how to re-link them, so it might be best for You to go to this wall of text (and videos) for reference.
Now, what You refer to as feminism is currently known as the "first wave" of feminism, and basically considered conservatism by today's feminists (even though there were also some "first wave" or at most "second wave" feminists hating on men - I believe Shoe0nHead quotes at least one of those in one of her videos, but in this case, I don't remember which one was that. I don't think it was as bad as modern feminism, anyway. The name we tend to use in Poland for those "first wave" feminists would translate best to "the emancipation movement" and I like it a lot, since it provides even more distance between those movements and what feminism is today. Now... What feminism is today is very much a man-hating cult that would prefer to see the men dead. Let me quote one of the most obvious examples of of that - in the discussion about the "male loneliness epidemic", one very honest feminist asked "What happened to males just kicking the bucket?" (proper punctuation is mine, but there might have been an additional "the" before the "males" 😃) - this showcases a complete disregard for men's lives and a wish for them to die. Now, I should know it's not an isolated case, even if most feminists are not this honest - most, if not all of them are at least fine with all men "kicking the bucket". The popularity of the #KillAllMen tag at some point does not lie. 😀
I just got some more receipts:
Is this an representation of modern feminism? ↗
Look at herumcommonsense's response (yes, I avoided the ping in order not to bring her here). That's Your average feminist these days.
@DishLady I understand Your frustration. The problem is, an ideology always becomes the sum of what people upholding it believe. Therefore, since most feminists today want men dead, as I hope I have sufficiently proven (starting from male fetuses), I am afraid that's what feminism is. That is also why men are triggered by feminism.
I happen to be familiar with Your takes and I know You are a good woman, and honestly "good woman", "sane woman" or simply "woman" is how I'd like to refer to You and women like You. Even if You hold some or even most of the ancient feminist beliefs, at the moment I feel like "feminist" is an insult towards good women. If You wanted to change that and have me call women like You feminists, I'm afraid You'd have to join Miss Shoe0nHead in fighting what feminism stands for today.
@CalmUntilAbused It's not frustration, it's refusal to engage the ridiculous.
@CalmUntilAbused Well said on all accounts... I don't think I can add much.
@DishLady You know I like you (other than your refusal to answer hypotheticals 😂). But feminism nowadays has changed a ton. All movements seem to start out with a good cause and then get corrupted somewhere along the way (ex. Blacklivesmatter, red pill movement, #MeToo, etc). The modern day feminists don't fight for equality. They fight for dominance and are synonymous with misandrists.
Why is it bad to be triggered about it? Feminism, just like capitalism, communism, zionism, etc. are all evil
A decent normal individual being triggered by evil is normal and justified.
It is just like asking 'Why are Palestinians so triggered by zionism'
I would say capitalism is the odd one out among those, but otherwise I wholeheartedly agree.
Considering that capitalism has the designed effect of making a few people. Rich and many people poor. I can't see why you think it should be the odd one out. I think it belongs right in there with the others. In fact. Arguably communism should not be in there. Communism at least argues for a relatively equal distribution of goods and the means of production. I realize that may piss off some very powerful people who want to retain their riches or at least accumulate those riches, but that is almost always at the expense of many others.
@msc545 You are making the same mistake many people in the West are doing. Capitalism is designed to distribute the goods proportionally to one's business skills and economic prowess. What You live in is corporationism, where corporations are allowed to "lobby" the government to do their bidding and work as one with the government to keep their workers/citizens constantly too exhausted to break out of it. Capitalism means equal opportunity for anyone willing and skilled enough to do business.
Now, as for communism... It might sound tempting in theory, but what it is known for is ensuring a relatively equal distribution of lead in people's skulls... But I guess one has to live in a formerly communist country in order to let it sink in properly.
One unpopular thing I could say about capitalism is that just like communism, it only works in theory. The saving grace of capitalism is that the solution to its flaw is a working anti-monopoly office, while the solution to the flaw of communism seems to be to distribute lead to the skulls of everyone who does recognize the flaw.
antitrust*
@msc545 The problem is not what the economic system of communism, but what it takes to establish it. People are naturally resistant to having the fruits of their labour taken from them to be "shared equally", especially if they are more skilled/dedicated than an average citizen. And I don't think the communists ever found a way to enforce it other than an equal distribution of lead into the defectors' skulls. Even the current left in the USA, while technically not communist (it's more cultural Marxism than economic Marxism), appears to not know a different way to do it. Their reactions to any Republican success in recent years were violent riots (like the anti-ICE riots in California), death threats (including against some VTubers, which is how I got track of these behaviours) and assassinations (like what happened to Charlie Kirk).
Capitalism is far easier to fix - You only need an antitrust office. Much less blood gets spilled, even if You include China-like punishments for corrupt politicians and government officials. And even when not working perfectly, it's still less harmful than any implementation of communism known to history.
@CalmUntilAbused I actually live in California in Los Angeles. There have been no anti-ice riots here that I'm aware of, and I would be aware of them if they had occurred. I'm not certain about death threats against VTubers, and that's certainly possible, although I've not heard of it. I realized that Charlie Kirk was assassinated, but the reasons for that assassination and the motives of the person who actually did it are still very unclear to me. I would not necessarily make any definitive statements about that sad incident. All that being said, I agree that people have a terrible reaction when you take away or redistribute their stuff. There is plenty of history from China that supports that.
As for the Antitrust Office and the antitrust enforcers, there is a significant problem you have not yet addressed, and I wish you would. That is the problem of enshitification, which, if you are not familiar with it, describes a process whereby a regulated industry becomes so wealthy that it's possible and likely that it will actually begin to purchase or control the regulators essentially. Thus, the regulators themselves become regulated by the industry that they were assigned to regulate. This is corruption at its heart, and it is almost impossible to avoid in capitalism. I will leave the likely resulting behavior of the industry that was formerly regulated to your imagination.
")."*
I'd be thankful if You could explain that part to me.
As for the death threats (including against VTubers), it actually began a long time ago (check out the Pikamee situation, that's quite a story), apparently, but after the recent Trump victory, we got a new iteration of this behaviour.
About the assassination of Charlie Kirk, I do agree we do not know every detail about the motive, but we are sure beyond reasonable doubt that it was a leftist hit. The only way it wasn't a leftist hit would be if it was a false flag by the Juice (given the inscriptions on the bullet cases, though, I think it is very unlikely - they do not put the blame on any specific group the Juice might want eliminated, and it even clears the Muslims of any possible blame - any brand of leftist, but at the same time no brand of Muslim could have written those). Therefore, I am forced to conclude it was a leftist hit. One that made many of those death threats so much more grim, to be honest.
Now, about the corruption (or "enshittification") of antitrust measures, I am very much aware of them. That's why I said the USA is not capitalist, but corporationist. That's also why I hinted at China-like punishments (capital punishment, that is) for corrupt politicians and government officials - we could add the reversal of all legislation passed because of the "lobbying" efforts after a certain politician is proven to have been corrupted by some company.
@msc545 So both sides were lying? I'm not sure about Los Angeles, but I'm almost sure both sides agreed on California in general as the location of those riots. Also, Hasan Piker was supposedly present there, and he definitely lives in California (I just checked that one). It could be San Francisco or something, but it seems like too much of a stretch to say it wasn't California.
I also want to note that there may be a problem of language here. Trump and his minions tend to characterize any demonstration that is not celebrating or insisting on something they want as as a" riot". We have a long and honorable history of political demonstrations in this country and we are not going to stop them just because Trump finds them offensive sometimes. If he feels the need to deploy the national guard or law enforcement in general in response to a demonstration, then so be it. There is an awful lot of videotape depicting ice in national guard members physically abusing legal demonstrators. This is a problem obviously.
Opinion
32Opinion
My frustration stems not from feminism itself, but from women who remain passive observers. They fail to publicly or privately denounce the extremist fringes masquerading as feminists. These extremists propagate misandry through statements like “all men are feral,” “all men need to die,” or “kill all men.” This includes a reluctance to criticize figures such as the DoorDash driver in a recent high-profile case, where false allegations of assault led to her own legal repercussions for privacy violations.
Additionally, there is an oversight in acknowledging how even unsubstantiated accusations can devastate professional lives, reputations, and mental health. Such inaction equates to complicity. It signals implicit endorsement or tolerance of these radical elements and their broader societal harms. Furthermore, this silence extends to ignoring double legal standards in family law, such as biases in child custody decisions that often favor mothers despite gender-neutral statutes. Single fathers face significant disadvantages in these systems, often due to persistent stereotypes portraying mothers as primary caregivers. In divorce settlements, men frequently encounter unequal obligations for alimony and child support, with studies showing gender differences in post-divorce economic outcomes and judicial decisions. Although some research highlights biases against women in asset divisions or specific contexts like rural courts, the overall pattern reveals systemic inequities that disadvantage men in custody and parental rights, underscoring the necessity for balanced internal discussions within feminist circles to address these disparities.
While some research challenges the notion that feminism inherently involves misandry, other studies highlight instances where extreme views within feminist discourse do exhibit anti-male sentiments. This underscores the need for internal critique to maintain credibility. In the end, this calls back to what true feminism is meant to be: a movement rooted in core principles of gender equality, empowering all individuals regardless of gender, and addressing injustices through inclusive advocacy that benefits both women and men.
There's no doubt feminism was needed back in the day when the first movement started. I believe in equal rights and all that. There are even some parts of the world right now that could benefit from feminism (particularly countries in the middle east where Islam is widespread).
However, here in the west, modern feminism is a fight for dominance over men. Women already have equal rights. If anything, nowadays women tend to have more power than men.
They'll fight for equal pay in sports, which is ridiculous. You should not be paid based on participation. You should be paid based on performance and the fact is, men are physically stronger and more capable than women in general, but especially so at the peak of athletics. The one area where women are actually better than men physically is flexibility. They tend to have more flexible muscle fibers, allowing them to naturally be more flexible.
There are biological differences women need to accept. Men generally excel in physical strength, spatial abilities, and some aspects of motor coordination due to greater muscle, bone density, and brain structure supporting these functions. Women have advantages in memory, empathy, verbal communication, and emotional processing, supported by unique neurological wiring and hormonal influences. Each sex demonstrates adaptive strengths, with differences evident in measurable physical and neurological domains across populations.
So yes, modern day feminism does piss me off. They have equality, yet they expect men to still be providers and protectors. They expect men to be the pursuers and initiators in dating. They expect men to not be as emotional. They want all the benefits of "traditional" without the responsibilities or expectations. They need to realize they can't have their cake and eat it too.
It's not the concept of equality, it's having equality of OUTCOME forced on society by modern feminism that's the issue.
I don't care if my doctor or my lawyer are men or women as long as they got there by being the best not because they had either boobs or balls.
Give equality of OPPORTUNITY and suddenly you find you've got the best nursing care in the world and they happen to be 90% women. Coincidentally you have some of the best engineers in the world and it's 90% men. That happened in Scandinavian countries where opportunities were prioritised.
And one small question - how did so many women get convinced sacrificing raising a family with a husband who loves and protects you for working for a boss who'll replace you in a week and use you up and spit you out for a younger model 100% of the time was somehow something to aspire to?
Probably because in the last decade or so you've had prominent Feminists who have decided instead of fighting for women's rights they'd just go after things that guys liked. "male privilege" toxic masculinity" "video games just embody the toxic male power fantasy" and they go on and on. "i don't like that shirt the scientist was wearing."
As someone who considers herself a Feminist, i find these kinds of anti-everything feminists hella annoying
They never learnt from Frankenstein no matter how many adaptations it gets. And yes there are those who are bad actors in any cause but unless the ideology is only for bad actors it makes no sense to judge based on that.
Otherwise no point in having any ideologies and they're all evil so whatever your ideologies are would also be...
Feminism in its original form is fine, pushing for equal opportunity for women.
But it's turned into radical feminism, saying that women are superior and men are worthless cheaters who want nothing but sex from women.
That's not true!
It's radical feminism that we guys don't like.
Feminism is cultural terrorism against men, families and children. Is a symptom of cultural decline. Will come to an end. Financial and cultural collapse and war will end it almost overnight. Then women will cling to men like baby possums to their mom. And if feminists win this cultural battle, they will end up with nothing.
Feminism is not about equality, and it never has been. Everyone is triggered by lies and hypocrisy.
i can't speak for all men but i personally get annoyed by feminists claiming to be all for "equality" and then continuing to be clearly not interested in male interest at all. clearly not being for equality but for "more rights for women", which they are trying to gaslight us into thinking it's the same but it's absolutely not.
like i have no issue with a feminist who says "i'm fighting for womens rights". you do you and more power to you. but don't tell me you're a feminist fighting for equality. that's like saying you're a nazi fighting for the jews.
a group that's been claiming all men are evil, pigs, rapist, etc. since their existence. do you expect men not to be triggered by such group.
also, the former prime minister of Canada is a cuck just like all the men who claimed they are feminists
People are skeptical of feminists for a myriad of reasons.
1. They say they want equality but ignore all the benefits women have and discrimination and inequality men face.
2. They dislike gender roles, only for themselves.
3. They don't pick male feminists.
Because feminism is a man-hating cult that especially hates white men and just causes hostility between men and women. Feminism is cancer.
Can you provide examples of feminism hating men to substantiate your claim?
Yes, it's all over the internet and youtube videos. You can listen to the things feminists say.
Can you give me some names and quotes?
No, because most of these feminists do not give their names. I'm speaking from experience by interacting and debating with feminists over the years, and things they have said like, "All men are potential rapists" or "Kill all white men" or "Women are happier being single." To me, this doesn't sound like equality. It sounds like anger and hatred.
I think you look in darker corners of the internet than I do.
@Steve-the-lion They might not give their names, but they are still quite open about their takes. Feel free to use my list of evidence whenever someone forces You to prove that grass is green. 😄
I'm not triggered by feminism. I support it. I'm triggered by moronic female fake feminists just like I'm triggered by moronic male Red Pill Incels.
It is evil and fights against natural order.
Natural order?
Men and women hot puberty, they are horny, they pair bond, have sex, raise families.
The new feminist push is to reject sex for reproduction as well as pleasure.
The pair bonding stage is to be rejected and women should spend their youth up to 30'sh taking pills to stop reproduction, experiment with partners 100% for pleasure only, focus on school, pleasure, travel, vaine entertainment. Maybe pair bond and have families 30 to 35 or never. Life no longer has meaning, duty and is 100% about individualism and pleasure seeking.
Instead of following natural drives and have a family in the youthful, fertile years and then working or pursuing career, if interested, once the kids are in school or almost grown society pushes to risk missing their healthy window and gamble it can happen, finding a willing mate and having a family 35-45.
It preaches family is not living to her full potential, it says "don't you want to do more, be more?", it implies they are oppressed and short changed by following natural nature and that putting this all off and stressing in a job and serving a company is the meaning of life.
Men and women hate each other now, divorces everywhere, relationships suck. Few births and few stable family homes.
That is failing... miserably, not progress.
You have bought into conservative fear mongering sadly, women who have a successful career, educated, financially stable and independent are also more likely than not to enjoy a fulfilling sex life. The idea that women gaining equality will somehow make them asexual is just plain wrong
I would say you have bought into the deny biology and natural instincts of NATURAL REPRODUCTION to use drugs and abortions to stop reprodunction and to live childless, family less lives.
Without drugs and abortions families NATURALLY OCCUR.
Now we we hoards of family less childless people aging with no support or lineage, population collapse.
UNNATURAL.
AGAINST NATURAL BIOLOGY.
They essentially hate men. Why would we be in favour of that? Only a testosteroneless simp with no self respect would be in favour of that.
He admitted to being a pussy. I'd be pissed too if the "man" in charge of my country came out as gay.
People are way too worried about labeling others these days.
I wasn’t a fan of him for many reasons, his views on feminism were not of particular concern
Do you think feminism is a label or something more?
When you hear about “waves” of feminism, yes. Those are labels. You can label based on what the person, in your mind acts and believes in.
I just stay in my own lane. I do not hate men and do feel like I should be afforded and equal opportunity if all is the same. What does that make me?
You probably in all reality are a feminist, just not a particularly radical one, I don’t buy into the notion of “radical feminism”
Fair point.
Tell me why do you feel the need to add race to the mix. This demonstrates you have a desire to vilify white men specifically. Do you think that that might be the reason men find feminism triggering.
Lol, male feminists are the biggest losers on the planet.
Because way too many men are intimidated by strong accomplished women. They do not want a partner in life but a doormat.
Family and divorce court for one, you’re too old and disconnected or removed from “dating” l or at least 20 and early 30 somethings to know the other reasons I guess
Probably because feminists hate men, and they will do anything they can to destroy men. That's why.
@msc545 You know, we agree on so many matters... What I cannot understand is how an aware man like You can hate on Trump when the opposite side is literally what You described here, just with the LGBTNKVD+ and BLM in tow... My logic is that if someone fights back against people who either want me dead or at least for my life to be ruined, I can live with their shortcomings and I will vote for them. Not that I could vote for Trump, I am not a US citizen.
@CalmUntilAbused I am a mental health professional at the doctor level, and because of that, I can see very clearly the mental disorder that Trump has and the potential consequences for it. He is a very dangerous man. I do not hate him. He is extremely disturbed and should have been treated years ago. Right now, we are reaping the consequences of an untreated mental disorder. It would be very unfair and unreasonable of me to hate somebody who has a condition that they are not responsible for and they did not cause.
@msc545 Okay, that would explain most of Your seemingly anti-Trump posts. But still, no matter what Trump's afflictions might be, He is not a direct threat to any American's life. I suppose Palestinians might hate Him, but for male US citizens, He means salvation from the Demo (n) crat nightmare. Maybe I am too out-of-the-loop, since I am not a US citizen and I don't even live in the USA, but I don't know of any consequences of His actions that would directly harm any US citizen. Between Him and the Demo (n) crat offer, I would take Trump in 100% cases.
@CalmUntilAbused, unfortunately, he has abused, neglected, and harmed American citizens, including American men, in many ways. Most recently, he did severe moral injury to the servicemen who fired the missiles he ordered at those fishing boats in the Caribbean. Those men broke the law by doing this. And they know they did. And they have to live with that for the rest of their lives. He made them into murderers. I can't excuse that.
What @dishlady says is correct. Unfortunately she's the minority of feminists. The activists, the radicals who are in the majority, or are at least the loudest are the ones who make men hate feminism and feminists.
Feminism is just hatred of men, so men don't like politicians who openly hate them unless they also hate themselves.
That's odd and weird because to believe in equality doesn't make one a feminist. Being against men for women is what does.
Because modern feminism is not about equality. It's no longer pro women. It doesn't take a genius to see it has become anti-men.
There is nothing wrong with equality. Equality is equal opportunity. But equity is fatal. Equity is equal outcomes.
100% of the white men here in Canada did not give a single shit about this
I feel you are not being truthful, it was quite triggering for white males. They were very vocal about the issue
Plain and simple... lack/refusal of research & understanding, then going for social media extremists as the example
Because is makes it impossible to raise good children and have a balanced household
This feminism iteration is too often about hating men.
Because those people either do not understand stand what feminism inherently is or are misogynistic.
I don't think men are against feminism
But I think that guy Trudeau was a bit wishy washy/ wuss
New guy is similar making u turns on climate🙂
Because it destroys relationships , families and people's jobs.
I have no problem with feminism at all.
Holidays 
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions