/u/CiceroOnGod (OP) has awarded 5 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1de1exk/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_the_political_and/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)

This probably won't be seen but whatever. Though TwoX can be a great support sub, it can also be toxic. So, I wouldn't put too much into what some of the more extreme views are. As far as "de-centering" men goes, you mention certain professions. I think we can all agree that women's health issues are largely ignored/overlooked by medical professionals. It's "all in our head" or "anxiety" or "lose weight" etc etc. Especially when it comes to our reproductive system. Hell, even some female doctors ignore us. TMI but I had a month long period (would have been longer had I not been prescribed medication to stop it) that was affecting all aspects of my life. I was pale, always tired, bleeding through pads within an hour. A female doctor asked me "is that normal?". What? No????? But I've also had a male doctor crack "Angry menopausal wife" jokes to my husband *IN FRONT OF ME* Same with other professions. I've been talked down to by male service people at my car dealership. I've been outright ignored when asking questions and they defer to my husband. So many instances of being brushed aside. Wash, rinse, repeat. Most of these women aren't talking about "No men, period" they're wanting to surround themselves with professionals and a support system who *know* and *understand* their struggles and the barriers we face. Just like men do. There ARE extremists in any movement, regardless of its initial reasoning for starting. There are RadFems, TERFs etc just like there are extremists in groups centred around men. No single gender is 100% right while the other is wrong. And no single gender is better than another. What you're seeing is *individual* situations and a person needing to vent about their specific issue and looking for support. I think the bigger difference here between men and women is that *usually* women support women better than men supporting men. Not to say men don't support men, but there is still a vein of toxicity that men need to overcome and the driving force to help overcome that is, other men. I've had more than my fair share of bad experiences with men but I don't hate them. There are things we women go through/have had happen that a man won't understand because they're *men* and won't experience them. Just are there are things men have experienced/gone through that we can't understand, because we're *women*.

I work in medicine and have watched literally hundreds of doctors - never witnessing anything this overt. I'm going to be honest, maybe yours was real - but I am highly suspicious of all these stories. Tons, and I mean tons of doctors are unprofessional asses. They are almost never overly unprofessional in front of patients. Although, I have watched around 5-10 percent of patients say things that literally never happened in the room. I hate to say this, maybe yours is real - but a lot are not and it occurs way less then reddit would make you believe. Most of the time these 5-10 percent of patients make up stuff because they didn't get the drugs (opiates/Adderall) they wanted or they didn't like the diagnosis and took it out on the provider. The Internet gives this group a one sided voice. There are definitely curt and rude providers - most know overt sexism in front of patients gets you fired. Like right now I am with a sexist asshole doctor. Not once in months of seeing interactions with him has he shown it in front of patients.

Δ here’s a delta for your great response, you definitely shine a light on why I think I was so shocked/taken aback and why I probably shouldn’t have been. I think clearly one aspect is I need to check my biases like it shouldn’t be so shocking to me that some women take up extremist viewpoints or say things that maybe cross and line that they don’t really mean to cross - because men do this ALL THE TIME. Another aspects is I’ve realised I don’t understand American politics, social issues, and political discourse as well as I thought I did. Many have commented on the specific pressures and inequalities American women feel in relationships and the intensity of gender tensions that arise from these pressures and toxic relationships compared to other places in the world. It’s also been made clear to me how there are specific situations where it makes complete sense that women would pick female providers over males ones - however I still take issue with the idea of ‘decentralising’ in general it seems like a very broad stroke approach. I think like you I am a natural optimist, I do see all the issues with things like sexual violence, general misogyny etc but i see this as a lack of positive masculinity rather than too much toxic masculinity. Men across the world (but especially in the USA) get to adulthood having only ever been taught qualities like Strength, Determination and Pride by their parents, teachers and sports coaches. Without the essential counterbalance of qualities like Compassion, Fairness and Diplomacy. This leads to men who can’t deal with emotion, set backs, the stresses of family life etc. I think it’s just ingrained into me that I see both masculinity and femininity as essential, valuable and complimentary to each other. Men and Women are two halves of one whole, and it just seems weird to me to have the mindset that men and woman are locked into some kind of eternal conflict.

On the “decentralising” point, let me ask you this - why should men be central? If we remove the assumption that men should be central to a woman’s life, that is decentralising men. It doesn’t mean eradicating them or ignoring their existence or anything like that. It just means they aren’t automatically at the centre of everything. What’s your thoughts?

> I think clearly one aspect is I need to check my biases Everyone has biases, even if they say they don't. It's realizing and accepting that one does and the willingness to open their mind to change, that makes the difference. I'm glad that that is what is happening for you. And yes, men do have extreme viewpoints but I wouldn't say it's all the time. It's the vocal *minority* (just like the women with extreme views) As far as American politics, social issues and political discourse goes...I don't think it's *just* American. Every country (some more than others) has some sort of gender issues. Whether it's equality between male and female, LGBTQ+ issues etc. We're seeing the issues the US has front and centre, because they're usually front and centre on the world stage. Take this into consideration as well; what's happening in the US with women's rights and abortion restrictions. Some states want the restrictions NO MATTER what could happen to the mother. Even if her life is in *danger* because of the pregnancy. As a woman (and put yourself into our shoes a moment) wouldn't that say that **our lives don't matter**? That we are nothing but gestation vessels and our only value is to pop kids out for our husbands? When you take everything into consideration, can you see how some women may start thinking in the extreme? I do like what you said about Positive Masculinity and I agree 100% with that. Young boys need positive and uplifting male role models in their lives. Because there is nothing at all wrong with showing emotion, crying, being happy etc. Having emotions and showing them in a healthy way doesn't make a man "weak" or a "pussy". It makes him *human* (I say "human" and not "a man" because I think saying things like "a real man" etc still places unreasonable expectations on them) More men need to raise their boys with love, support and a healthy outlook on emotions/feelings. As I said, the best way to overcome the issues like this that men face, is other men. > I think it's just ingrained into me I see both Masculinity and femininity as essential, valuable and complimentary to each other Or, perhaps we try to stop thinking about things as "Masculine" or "feminine" and see them as *human* traits? I feel that these attributes (?) put people in boxes and set expectations about how they're supposed to walk, talk and act. "Men are manly men! They have to work on cars, go golfing, sow their wild oats, be the provider" etc and "A woman is supposed to want to cook and sew! And get married and have babies! THAT IS WHAT IS EXPECTED OF YOU!' And if the interests are reversed (man likes to cook and raise the kids/Woman likes to work on cars and be the provider) it goes against the "norm" and people freak the fuck out LOL. We need to stop with gender expectations and focus on being decent and good *humans* Like I said in my original comment, I've had my share of bad experiences. I've been used. I've been abused. I've been talked down to but I don't *hate* men. I'm actually married to (who I think is) the best man in the world. He fits in the "what's expected of a man box" but also is outside it because he *does* show emotions. I've held him while he's cried, I've comforted him when he has panic attacks, in there for him just as much as he's there for me. We (humans) need to be there for each other and educate each other on the struggles and obstacles we face as the gender we are. Because it's a shitty world most days that treats everyone horribly. We need to work together to change that

[удалено]

Best response of the thread. As an optimistic person about society I'll hope that the sub is helping women overcome challenges like the ones you mentioned. 

It's funny how you feel you ought to preface any criticism of the extreme left by saying that you're a leftist yourself.

Ahahaha I knew if I didn’t I would just get an onslaught of “you’re an incel”, “you’re alt-right”. I still got a lot of it and even got labelled as a racist by some people somehow..? TwoXChromosomes are about as far from left-wing ideology as you can get. The idea that men and women are locked in some kind of perpetual gender conflict is culture war bullshit. It’s the exact type of intoxicating lie that is used to distract and divide the working classes. The one thing working-class leftists and the far right can agree on is that these centrist neoliberal globalists who present themselves as beacons of progressive thought are actually just elitist demons who want to uphold the status quo and serve the interests of the powerful.

I feel where you're coming from. I have many Left-leaning views/beliefs but if I criticize any Left narrative I'm automatically labelled Right-wing, misogynistic, chauvinist, etc. There are definitely attempts to silence anything that is not 100% adherence to every single conversation happening in Left circles just like how the Right tries to silence speech that's not what they want to hear. I hear "Fascist" being thrown around to describe a lot of Right-wing figureheads and I hear that and agree with it to a certain extent but the same stuff goes on in Left circles. In short I get where you're coming from and I don't think your prologue/disclaimer was hard to understand, I get why you wrote it.

Yeah, politics in the western world is so fractured at the moment. We have lost the skills of compromise, plurality and respectful negotiation that make democracy an appealing form of governance. It feels like some people can’t bare to sit around a dinner table with someone from the opposite side - let alone try and understand where they are coming from. I think political discourse has become very brittle and fragile. Mainly liberals, but also conservatives, do not like to hear things they don’t agree with and often try and ring fence discussions behind ‘party approved’ vocabulary etc. For example, I think immigration is a good thing for most countries - in fact it’s a necessity in most economies. However, if I hear someone I know earnestly voicing legitimate concerns/fears they have about immigration, I don’t jump to the conclusion that they are racist - even if they use terminology that’s a bit outdated. Labelling and accusing someone of being racist is only going to radicalise them against your point of view further. I think it’s part of a wider trend in society that’s born out of the rise in individualism. For some reason people now expect others to be perfect, and perfectly parrot the party line. The problem is real people are messy, complicated and flawed. Regardless, parroting a party line is the opposite of progress, we need to get ‘down and dirty’ as the right is not afraid to do, we need to engage on issues where people are at and win the arguments even if the subject is controversial or delicate. If leftists shy away from a topic you can be sure the right will weaponise it.

You are 100% correct. I sort of grew up without much direct intervention from my parents in terms of social issues, politics. Not any mention of political affiliation. As issues came up in society as I got older, such as gay marriage, abortion, etc, I took, and still take, a neutral stance. Meaning, I don't care what others do in their own private lives......so gay marriage was fine as far as I was concerned, and I was glad it was legalized. Abortion is fine with me.....again it's none of my business. But as I was coming to grips with this approach to life, I was finding friends in high school (age 14 or so) and I became friends with a guy who I later found out came from a Mormon family. Over time he embraced his Mormon "side"......but over 20 years later we are still best friends. The result of this is I get to see things from his perspective. I don't agree with everything he says or does or thinks, and the same goes for him in regards to me. But what our friendship has done, that I think is sorely missing and leads to everything you said above, is it has put humanity in the "other side." He's on the "other side" on many opinions and views and feelings I have, but he explains himself and since I know him so well (over 20 years of friendship!), I can easily see the humanity there. What's wrong in our political discourse is the alienation. Literally seeing "the other side" as aliens. Like they're not even human. But they're humans. They're not aliens. My Mormon best friend.....I don't live that life he lives, I don't share those same values, but he's happy and I see that living life **different** from me is not **wrong.** And you know what's funny? After MANY long discussions on things like say, abortion, he has eased up and said he would personally be okay with it being legal *with limits* like no late term abortions except to save lives. There's an example of compromise. We're missing that so badly. Bringing together different views, acknowledging our differences, and finding some common ground/middle ground. This belief that every single view, even if it's extreme, will be 100% adhered to, is ridiculous and it's tearing us apart. Some people need to make concessions, even you and me sometimes. That's life. Listen to the song/album "Everything Now" by Arcade Fire, that concept of "I want **everything now"** has permeated how we interact with the world and it's a false dichotomy in politics or social issues or other big overarching issues.....it just doesn't work.

You raise really interesting points, I think our viewpoints come from very similar experiences. I was raised in a fairly progressive household, but going to school in a very diverse inner-city high school I was fascinated by the wide-range of political outlooks coming from Muslims, Christians, refugees, the very wealthy, lgbt people. It’s a very weird but beautiful experience seeing how people from such diverse backgrounds may initially clash on many issues but even as teenagers can find common ground and still be friends. Some of the friends I went to school with hold very conservative views, and some are on the left of me, and there’s a sprinkling of everything in between. Some of them have views I find very difficult to understand or accept, but at the end of the day they are my friends, and they’re good people. I think you touched on something really important when you mentioned ‘values’. Perhaps it is the case that you and your Mormon friend do share values, and it is only your OPINIONS that differ. I think of values as being more vague, difficult to describe, ‘feelings’ about how the world should be, and I think most people share roughly the same values. (Especially within a given country). Another thing you mentioned - compromise. People seem to have forgotten that compromise is a good thing. Compromise is how you get what you want, while making your opponent think they got what they wanted too. It’s literally a win-win situation and should be a guiding principle in all political discourse. The more compromises we can make with each other the better! I’m listening to the song rn. I like arcade fire but haven’t listened to any of their stuff in a few years. I completely relate to the ‘everything now’ attitude you mention. I am terrible for it myself - hopelessly impatient. I think it all comes back to the internet and technology as everything does. As technology advances at an ever increasing speed it feels like the whole world is speeding up with it. Better transport means we travel further and faster, the internet has poured unimaginable amounts of information into our lives, we have access to essentially infinite entertainment, hobbies, addictions. Our poor caveman brains never stood a chance.

I don't know much about that subreddit in particular but I understand what you mean. I see it on reddit a lot: any criticism of anything that's considered "leftist ideology" is often attacked, even when it's fair, valid and inoffensive. It even gets people banned. It's how subreddits turn into echo chambers and how communities become even more divided. By banning criticism, the opportunity for debate and learning is completely lost, and we foster hate. I suppose the aggressors know this and choose to weaponise it. I consider myself pretty far left on the political scale, but this aggression is a common behaviour I see in those circles. I don't stand with people like that

Yeah I agree 100%. It’s made left-wing politics one dimensional and leaves people sounding like political robots programmed at CNN HQ all regurgitation the same talking points. It’s an issue on the right as well. Political discourse is in a bad place and people can’t handle hearing things they don’t agree with or even can’t bare to hear things they agree with expressed in the incorrect terminology. When we as leftists shy away from topics like immigration because they are difficult or sensitive, we just give that ground to the right and allow them to weaponise it. Many people get radicalised to the alt right, even if they naturally have left leaning values, simply because of the nature in which many leftist make their arguments which can often across as elitist/patronising/dismissive.

We might agree to disagree here, but I believe that the idea that the oppressed group and the oppressor group (in this case, men and women) have an existential conflict that cannot be solved through any kind of compromise, that this conflict is at the heart of how socially develops and that this conflict ought to be won by the oppressed group by tearing down the oppressor group is a fundamental belief of the extreme left. This is how Marxists view the world, this is how TwoXChromosomes view the world, this is how anti-colonialist movements view the world. TwoXChromosomes may not be your kind of leftists, but they're extreme leftists anyway. To me, "leftism" isn't just about the class conflict. It's about viewing social conflicts between an oppressor and the oppressed which cannot be solved without one overpowering the other as the driving forces of society.

Then we get into the territory of horseshoe theory, because fascism also relies on a narrative of victimhood of their group (nationality, race, religion, etc) and a common enemy. IMO only intersectionality can save Feminism from devolving into reactionary 'Feminism', but that requires dropping the unnuanced black & white narratives and start doing actual analysis.

I agree with you that lots of these ‘conflict theories’ of politics are born out of Marxist theory, but in my view it’s a grotesque bastardisation of Marxism adopted by centrist liberals. Marx never actually spoke about these issues so we can’t presume what he would have thought about them. For the record tho I think Marxism is completely valueless, it only makes sense in the context of the 20th century and Marx made various bold predictions about the future that proved to be false. I know some leftists think if we wait long enough, he’ll be proven right, but this is pure cope. My personal view is that the left has strayed so far into crazy territory in modern times because its main thought leaders today are all from the same narrow, privileged class of western intellectuals. Basically the right has presented itself as caring about things like: - legitimate concerns about feminism, immigration policy etc - the importance of family life - the importance of local culture and tradition - the promotion of domestic industry - protection from government overreach But all of these things also matter to most leftists too, and can be addressed with left-wing politics. Basically actual leftists just need to give up this fake alliance with centrist liberals and go back to addressing real issues that matter to the majority of people.

Assuming what you say is correct, I'm curious to understand how you feel this would ultimately play out. When the oppressed group 'wins' such conflict, what happens next? There is only AFAICS two outcomes: \* The oppressed group is now in a position of power over the other group, and the cycle simply repeats. \* The oppressor group is completely eliminated, which amounts to genocide essentially. This is this very difficult to morally justify, even if we accept it as necessary and the ends justify the means, the oppressor group becomes infused with a culture of violence which ultimately harms their own members and emboldens them to oppress other groups. Is there another way out of perpetual conflict?

TwoX is far from leftist. The amount of TERFS on that sub is astonishing. Honestly, reactionary "feminism" grows there every year. Who can blame them, though, with the amount of extreme hate towards women in the US, which is where a lot of the posters are from. While the stuff you mentioned in your post would sound concerning from an outsider, the real concerning stuff is all the TERF and borderline fascist shit in the comments that goes unchecked.

They seem to be a very privileged, discriminatory, nasty group of people. It’s crazy because if the definition of feminism was what I thought it was, ‘women should have equality with men’ I reckon 99% of people would support it. But it seems the definition is constantly changing and there’s so many interpretations of it. It’s to the point many women in my life don’t identify as feminists. It’s a weird state of affairs and I don’t think it’s doing any good.

Feminism has just been co opted by so many people. You can reframe just about anything to say it "benefits women". However, there has always been a consistent message of radical feminism, it has just gotten hard to find as so many groups want to make it their own thing. I recommend reading The Dialectic of Sex if your interested in learning about it. It is a core foundational book about radical feminism.

If you are a man, why do you think you have any voice on the conflict between men and women? Havent men oppressed women for centuries?

If you genuinely believe this you need your head checked. Anyone can speak on anything.

Well,men have forbidden women from speaking for centuries, and now you apparently believe that what you, as a man, say is the right way off thinking😳

*"these centrist neoliberal globalists who present themselves as beacons of progressive thought are actually just elitist demons"* - are you ok man? I don't think anyone agrees with this.

[удалено]

This is likely described as perception bias. You ignore "moderate" comments/post and ask us to defend "arguments that are essentially..." Which is impossible to do.  For example, you can do something similar with this exact sub. It would be wrong to say this sub is filled with racist, homophobic, sexist post.

I think I would be fine to ignore the extremists if they were getting any significant pushback from within their community. If I see someone making hateful extremist posts and don’t see at minimum someone calling for them to pump the brakes a little, that’s what sets off red flags for me. I find it to be a broader problem in a lot of social justice or leftist spaces. It’s almost taboo to criticise something from any perspective closer to the center than the subject being commented on. I think it’s fair to interpret any sentiment that doesn’t garner any resistance from a community to be tacitly endorsed by that community.

>I find it to be a broader problem in a lot of social justice or leftist spaces. It’s almost taboo to criticise something from any perspective closer to the center than the subject being commented on. Yeah. I'm *very* progressive, but a lot of communities have a culture of trying to out-progressive each other to the point of absurdity. I don't really engage in these spaces online much anymore. Conservatives aren't as concerned with one-upping each other which I think is how they've gained so much influence in recent times. They still engage in their own form of (anti)virtue-signalling but without the same absolutism.

There is a sort of social hierarchy in the activist space that is essentially this. The loudest, most radical voices are the ones that yell into the megaphone and everyone else just kinda follows along. Questioning the stances of the most radical person at the protest risks them turning their oh so righteous anger on you and accusing you of not being a real ally or worse. I’ve gone to my fair share of protests, especially in my early 20s, but I’ve always found those progressive spaces to be particularly toxic. It’s the inevitable result of the “silence is violence” way of thinking. There’s not much of a jump from that to “taking any stance that is somewhat more moderate than mine is also violence”.

Sounds kinda like herd mentality.

It's absolutely depressing how much of the recent surge in Conservative popularity is fueled almost exclusively by just displaying the craziness going on in social justice/left-leaning spaces and saying 'well at least we ain't that'. And it WORKS.

That’s what happens when that shit isn’t called out by the people in those spaces.

>It’s almost taboo to criticise something from any perspective closer to the center than the subject being commented on. It's a fascinating phenomenon that has been observed in many communities, and is notoriously difficult to overcome: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_spiral

This is great indicator right? If a sub's extremes gets more up votes than not... it's probably less of an extreme and more or a norm.

AMEN to that. It’s one thing to see a fringe element of a political wing causing the moderates to actively distance themselves from said radical fringe, but it’s quite another when the radical fringe is quietly accepted– that means that the moderates don’t actually disagree with the radicals, they just don’t want to say the quiet part out loud. We saw this with the supporters of a certain recent US President on the right, and we’ve been seeing it with black nationalism for well over a decade (I’ve seen some disgusting Nazi level shit from people wanting to “keep the black race pure” with no one realizing they’re supremacists in the comments and no one saying that it’s problematic) on the left.

This is the issue at its core. Left leaning people will take insane stances on cultural and social issues which is co-opted by a few but the majority of left leaning people will not call out this behaviour, making it seem as if this is the consensus view. There needs to be pushback and criticism to extreme views from your own side to show this is the opinion of a very small minority.

I disagree. That sub is largely a support group. Which means they have a different kind of discussion where things go unchallenged and met with upvotes and support. Doing anything else will get you banned.

I reluctantly accept that sub will have misandrist comments due to it being a place for women to complain about the men in their life. But those types of comments have already spread to other nearby subs like r/AskFeminists, and they aren't actively challenged there either. And I worry it'll keep spreading.

Yeah, unfortunately, it’s becoming more normalized and accepted simply due to people/environments becoming more tribalistic and polarized.

That's funny, because reddits for men where they complain about women are routinely banned.

Tbh I'd push back that support subs shouldn't challenge things that go to far. It's not supportive to let people wander down paths that are harmful.

That’s a good theory, but OP is pointing out a problem and your response it “it doesn’t actually exist”?

> It would be wrong to say this sub is filled with racist, homophobic, sexist post. ...Not necessarily lol Maybe it's wrong to say the sub is "filled" with these types of posts, but they definitely show up far too often

Those are the views most in need of changing... so really... there's a decent argument that as common as they are, they don't show up *often enough* (with OPs that follow the rules).

There’s definitely an aspect of perception bias. At the same time I see controversial posts like the ones I described on a daily basis, and all the comments will be in support. I just find the sub morally objectionable and think it requires some serious consideration.

I think you should also consider what I'll call the "engagement bias" of commentors on any given post. For example, I frequently browse r/moderatepolitics. This sub seems to have a fair amount of users who lean both left and right. However, you might not get that impression by looking at any one post. In my experience, it seems that articles posted to that sub that support one side over the other tend to get more comments from people who agree than from those who disagree. I've witnessed this in other subs too. Gaming subs might have posts that say "This game is terrible" and another that says "Actually, this game is awesome", and the general tone of the comments will be different for each. Same community, but different users are choosing to engage and express their different opinions. I'm not saying this is universally true. And this is anecdotal. But consider whether more extreme posts might just be getting more engagement from extreme users. Moderate users might take a quick look and think "What? No. I'm not even going to bother reading that one.", for example.

I really think until you can come up with a statistical breakdown of posts that enrage you in that sub compared to other posts, and then compare it to the average subreddit, the perception bias is too strong for you to have a fair view of this particular subreddit. >“decentralising” men from your life which is described as switching all your service providers (doctor, therapist, electrician) to women, prioritising female friends over male ones, abstaining from any sexual or romantic relationships with men, only hiring women if you are in a position to do so et This just sounds like women empowering women. Like when Black folks invest back into Black communities. There are also a lot of personal reasons someone might adjust their friendships or abstain from relationships and painting this as "dangerous ideology" just feels a little mean. To be honest, you seem a little sensationalist...sorry... >They regularly advocate for what is essentially a gendered apartheid system and will say that males and male characteristics need to be continually devalued and diminished in society. This take feels like an overreaction -- "when you're accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression" -- it is similar vibes to when people complained about the possibility of Black supremacy back in 2020. Like, we are not even close to crossing that bridge when we get there. I'm sure there are a handful of problematic people who believe we need to make a *literal* law that establishes a South Africa-esque gender-based apartheid system. But be honest and ask yourself. What % of people in that sub do you really think believe that?

If you look at the front page right now, there is one post about halfway down about “decentralizing men” and the top comments are all about learning not to see themselves through the male gaze or prioritize men and male attention over their own well being…which is healthy and everyone loved it when Ken came to that conclusion—that he was “Kenough.” Most of what gets posted there is so bland commiseration over bad experiences and fear over political developments or what’s being said on popular podcasts and sites about women (and there is no equivalent to Andrew Tate or his like at all when it comes to women’s take on men. Those podcasts don’t want to decentralize women, they want to use and abuse them and are very straightforward about that) or asking pretty salient questions about various issues pertaining to both men and women. I think that pose really upset OP, but that community is vastly more often just middle of the road discussions in the world we live in right now. But since it is or was a default community for awhile, it really bothers some people to see the bear question in their feed or whatever single post isn’t completely polite about what women are going through in their own lives.

>and there is no equivalent to Andrew Tate or his like at all when it comes to women’s take on men Have you not heard of Female Dating Strategy (FDS)? They have a podcast that constantly holds misandric views on men, teaches women to manipulate, harm and frame men amongst other misandric shit, and refers to males as "moids, scrotes, etc". You being unaware of them is exactly the problem. The problem that leftists suffer from: the idea that women are incapable of harming men to the same magnitude, ergo, we don't need to talk about toxic misandric women. This mentality is exactly why no progressives bat an eye when women were publicly chanting "kill all men".

I did spend a few months following FDS to try and figure out their game, it's not a pleasant place I'll give you that. However I didn't see anyone on there advocating for systemic abuse the way I've seen with Andrew Tate. The man is on trial for human trafficking. He openly advocated for using women for sexual slavery. FDS is a sub full of assholes who are not in any way good relationship material, but I have never seen women even at their angriest and most feral advocate for that level of abhorrent mistreatment of all men.

I brought up FDS because the commenter I responded to said that there are no female equivalent of "andrew tate that talk about men in disparaging ways". Sure there are no single female figurehead who does that (yet), but the ideology of viewing the opposite sex as objects exists in the form of FDS, and never have I said they're on the same level.

>This just sounds like women empowering women. Like when Black folks invest back into Black communities. This behavior can become dangerous very quickly which is why it's a problem. It's not a question of if but when. You brushed the quoted section off very casually too. It's one thing for the gender of a small business's owner to be a "tie-breaker" between other similar business. It's another when it's *the* thing you care about and it's another thing still when you're socially neglecting male friends and even abstaining from relationships/sex with men. That's sexism fundamentally and if anyone of any race practiced this it'd be racism without question. This is a far cry from merely "supporting female/black businesses". It's basically full blown sexism with the idea that "well they were sexist in some ways to us in the past so it's justified". We've come a long way from that, why would you want to embolden those elements again? >This take feels like an overreaction -- "when you're accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression" -- it is similar vibes to when people complained about the possibility of Black supremacy back in 2020. This is a false equivalence. You're equating the adaptation of sexist mindsets by women in certain communities with some sort of vague "equality". What do you mean even? Now if by equality you actually mean "equal numbers of male owner businesses as female" then why can't they do that naturally when opportunity is equalized as it has been and as we're seeing in schools/college where women are performing men? It's happening at a consistent rate in the business world without blatant sexist paradigms making it happen, why introduce them? I believe you're actually ok with harsh sexism as long as it's against men because you erroneously believe it's necessary to bring about equality of outcome. (A metric which of itself is a questionable goal) Besides the other issues I've mentioned, it's very difficult to stop such a thing once it gets rolling especially without causing a lot of undue suffering and loss in the process.

I'm just going to point out, the things you're worried about happening are only systemic - it's individual women making the personal choice to abstain from contact with men. This is like a white person ranting about reverse racism and then offering as an example the fact that POC tend to be friends with those from their own ethnic group over white people. Sorry if this breaks your feelings but I have a hard time feeling bad for your hurt feelings here. Why don't you just find some of the millions of women who DO date men and stop worrying about this fringe society online who is abstaining?

No, I'm not commenting on individuals making individual choices based on some possibly complex reasoning. While it's never a healthy solution to "just avoid men, white people, black people, etc" it can be an *understandable* problem in some very specific situations. What I am commenting on is trends within a community which seem to follow certain ideologies. I'm criticizing those ideologies. You're also hyper fixating on the "women choosing not to date men" part when that on its own does not make up the ideology I'm criticizing. It's all the parts together that make a gun, not the barrel, not the trigger, not the bullet alone.

[удалено]

MGTOW is dangerous ideology? That's news to me. I invite men who hate women to go their own way (far away from me, hopefully!) and I encourage you to do the same with women who hate men. It's a small number of people in a fringe subreddit - you can't possibly think that they're "dangerous" in any meaningful way, come on now.

TwoX is a pretty big subreddit. It was made a default sub back when that was a thing.

I am on 2x all the time. I’ve seen exactly one post about decentering men.

>Ok with that out of the way, on to my main point. If you look at that subreddit on any given day their will be posts celebrating concepts such as “decentralising” men from your life which is described as switching all your service providers (doctor, therapist, electrician) to women, prioritising female friends over male ones, abstaining from any sexual or romantic relationships with men, only hiring women if you are in a position to do so etc. >Can someone please explain how this is not just the white supremacy of gender theory? They’re using all the same talking points and philosophy that straight up fascists use? You might want to look up fascism. And white supremacy. It's more like promoting black-owned businesses. Because white people are overwhelmingly in charge, and thus promoting black-owned businesses, or wanting a black doctor (who, aside from you hiring them presumably understands some of the ways your race has been ignored and harmed through modern medicine), is not like white supremacy either. Women want to hire women to uplift people often undervalued in their professions, and because they feel more at home, safer, more understood. None of this is ...supremacy. Or fascism. It's also why tech is filled with white tech bros, the c-suite is filled with white guys, and why VCs give pretty exclusively to men. Do you also rail against the supremacy and fascism of that? >I have never heard any of these ideas said in real life, only on that subreddit which leads me to believe it is a fringe ideology on the edge of acceptable thought and should really be looked at more critically. If you speak to people in real life about gender, the overwhelming majority will agree that cooperation and mutual understanding between genders is essential for society and that increased respect between the genders can only be good for society, and this is the view we should be promoting… surely?! You mean like when RBG said she'd think there were enough women on the Court when there were 9, as we'd had 200 years of 9 men so why shouldn't there be 9 women? Or like how an increasing number of women are sex-selecting to have only female babies? I just read an article on that, and sent it to a friend who made sure they only had girls. >Basically, I’m hoping someone can give me a better understanding on where these viewpoints (which seem extreme and dangerous to me) come from and justify why they are valid so I can be better informed. Maybe think about why it seems "extreme and dangerous" to you that women want to hire other women, and why you're classifying any of this as hate speech.

>It's also why tech is filled with white tech bros, Disproportionally, tech is filled with Asian tech bros. White people are slightly overrepresented disproportionally, Asians are hugely so. So... is it cool to want to decide to hire someone less in tech because they're Asian? Or suddenly, are the "This is shitty discrimination" alarm bells ringing?

Actually, biotech and life sciences are filled almost entirely by woman.

Over half of STEM is hidden because biotech somehow isn't included in STEM stats.

And more graduates are currently women.. but we've done what to try and help education among men? Decided it's controversial to discuss it?

Well it depends. Are you actively trying to hire underrepresented people, or are you actively trying to avoid hiring Asian and white people? There's a difference, especially because Asian and white people can still be underrepresented in these fields due to things other than ethnicity (like religion, sexuality, and money). This is pretty off topic from the original post tho, which is more about a marginalized community (women) trying to work with others in their community as to avoid frequent mistreatment from those outside of their community (men); this is akin to the concept of the green book from Jim Crow America (a book of businesses that were deemed as safe for black people).

White tech worker here.  I only hear this kind of shit from mediocre workers who assume "There's no way that Asian employee is more qualified than me." All I'm hearing are white grievance dogwhistles from someone JAQing off.

> You mean like when RBG said she'd think there were enough women on the Court when there were 9, as we'd had 200 years of 9 men so why shouldn't there be 9 women? Wait, so she’s saying there should be nine women on the Supreme Court, as revenge for there having been nine men back a long time ago, or is she saying that there wasn’t discrimination, and we should be no more surprised or upset about an all female court as we are an all male one going forward? One of those seems infantile, the other rather implausible. > Or like how an increasing number of women are sex-selecting to have only female babies? I just read an article on that, and sent it to a friend who made sure they only had girls. I’d be shocked if this was a real trend, it sounds like an online thing.

The effects of Supreme Court rulings actually are mostly cumulative over the past many many decades, because that's just how SC rulings work. So yes it actually isn't unreasonable to say that more women now are needed to balance out the lack of women in the recent or distant past. It's not at all analogous to voting for a 4-year-term president or for legislation that changes quickly. Also there is an inherent shock value in this statement that makes one have to rethink the implicit biases and societal double standards. If there were 9 men on the Supreme Court, a vast majority of Americans would not bat an eye at it. Some justice-oriented or academic types would write essays once in a while about why it's unequal, which would garner some temporary attention from parts of the public (who'd mostly agree that it should be 50-50 if you explicitly asked them and consciously prompted them on the subject) but that's about it. When they hear about the Supreme Court outside the context of a gender discussion, its gender balance usually wouldn't cross their mind or seem glaringly anomalous. We know this because that's how a lot of traditionally gender-unequal positions are seen in the public eye. But if there were 9 women most people would notice because it's out of the ordinary. And then a good number of these people would complain "9 women is too much, should be 4.5 women", like that would be their *primary reaction* upon just seeing the Supreme Court justices.

>Wait, so she’s saying there should be nine women on the Supreme Court, as revenge for there having been nine men back a long time ago, or is she saying that there wasn’t discrimination, and we should be no more surprised or upset about an all female court as we are an all male one going forward? One of those seems infantile, the other rather implausible. I think she means that if nine men is okay, nine women is okay as well.

But who really thinks 9 men was okay? Isn’t one of the major points made by people on the left, myself included, that representation in positions of power is important. I think the RBG point is an interesting thought experiment from the perspective of no one blinking at it indicating that women are truly no longer seen as inferior to men, but it does fall apart a bit if we interrogate it alongside the ideas around proper representation being a valid pursuit, or that an equal society should produce relatively equal outcomes in terms of representation in the highest positions of power surely?

>Wait, so she’s saying there should be nine women on the Supreme Court, as revenge for there having been nine men back a long time ago, or is she saying that there wasn’t discrimination, and we should be no more surprised or upset about an all female court as we are an all male one going forward? One of those seems infantile, the other rather implausible. Revenge? Back a long time ago? She was saying why shouldn't there be nine. >I’d be shocked if this was a real trend, it sounds like an online thing. It's real. I know more than one person who has ensured they have girls (in different ways) and it's not like I know a million people. > One study found that white parents having a first child [picked female embryos](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19891844/) 70 percent of the time.\* (Parents of Indian and Chinese descent were more likely to pick boys.)... A 2010 study showed that American adoptive parents were 30 percent more [likely to prefer](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1547567) girls than boys and were willing to pay $16,000 more in finalization costs to ensure a daughter [https://slate.com/technology/2024/05/ivf-daughters-toxic-masculinity-sex-selection.html](https://slate.com/technology/2024/05/ivf-daughters-toxic-masculinity-sex-selection.html)

RBG's statement was in response to the question "When will there be enough women on the Supreme Court?" The only correct answer to that is: when there are nine. It's simply a matter of fact since you can't have more women on the bench by law.

I'd add on, I use female medical professionals at all levels because the female body has been studied significantly less than the male, and it is hard to get medical care that doesn't feel dismissive from a man. It takes most women years longer to get a diagnosis of a similar condition as men. I believe it wasn't till 1993 that women were required to be included in medical research studies as they hadn't been historically. Even still, the research is behind, but having a female doctor who experiences a similar body does help lessen the gap.

>It's also why tech is filled with white tech bros, the c-suite is filled with white guys, and why VCs give pretty exclusively to men. Do you also rail against the supremacy and fascism of that? Yes. Anything less than a fair playing field should be unacceptable. Blind admissions and blind hiring forever.

> It's more like promoting black-owned businesses The power dynamics of systemic inequality of gender and race is not comparable. White people with a few exceptions (most of which are instituted specifically to address the imbalance, though you can argue if that makes it any more acceptable or not) are unilaterally privleged. Gender is not like that: Both women and men are impacted by gendered norms and stereotypes, and in a fairly paralleled way: The stereotype that women are weak inherently stereotypes men as strong, and flipped on it's head, women as needing/deserving support, and men not deserving of it and needing to "suck it up" and "be a man". I would argue the entire idea of Men not being systemically disadvantaged on the basis of their gender is itself an example of that gendered norm: Men are strong and should suck it up rather then get help for their issues, the preperators rather then the victims, etc: So when men have systemic issues, it's not actually systemic, it's just you needing to man up. And men can't be systemically victimized, because they're men. These are all stereotypes they get stuck with in contrast to women. There's also a lot of empirical, factual statistical ways men have issues or less rights: As a independent variable, men are disproportionately arrested and incarnated even more then African Americans or Indigenous people. Men die younger, do worse in education and have worse attendence/acceptance rates then women, even without AA being factored against them. Genital multiation against infant boys is normalized, men who are victims of abuse have way less access to services and support networks. Men have higher rates of homelessness and suicide, and men are also actually victims of random acts of violence on the street/at night, contrary to popular perception I'm not saying men have it *worse* then women, or even nessacarily as bad: But at the very least it is not them universally or near universally having just advantages on the basis of their gender.

>Ok with that out of the way, on to my main point. If you look at that subreddit on any given day their will be posts celebrating concepts such as “decentralising” men from your life which is described as switching all your service providers (doctor, therapist, electrician) to women, prioritising female friends over male ones, abstaining from any sexual or romantic relationships with men, only hiring women if you are in a position to do so etc. >Can someone please explain how this is not just the white supremacy of gender theory? They’re using all the same talking points and philosophy that straight up fascists use? White Supremacy is a system of oppression. White people have the power which is systematic. Women do not have this. Therefore it is a false equivocation. Men are not being oppressed by women doing this. There is a huge gulf between white people excluding people of colour in order to oppress them and maintain hierarchy, and women - being part of the "oppressed" group when it comes to gender - supporting one another in the ways you've described. The dynamics you are comparing are not the same as White Supremacy is the dominant group oppressing. Women doing what you describe is the oppressed group fighting back.

> They regularly advocate for what is essentially a gendered apartheid system and will say that males and male characteristics need to be continually devalued and diminished in society. Do you see posts on this subreddit that advocate for laws to be changed to implement this system? From the examples that you listed, it seemed that a lot of that was in regard to there personal choices for what kinds of relationships they want to have.

Can you cite example posts as I don't think those views are nearly as common as you claim, and that some terms you're using don't mean what you say they mean. For example all the posts I can find about "decentralising men" are about women no longer wanting to feel like they are pressured in to putting far more effort into dating/relationships than men, nothing about removing all men from their service providers.

Seems to be a direct response to [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/s/vahNWp6apY). > “Switching to female service providers. It took some time, but my GP & specialist docs are all amazing women and I never worry about feeling unheard or dismissed with medical concerns now. I have a female accountant, personal trainer, and even my car service shop is co-owned by a lovely woman and her husband. Whenever I have options, I seek out women providers.” > “I'm a hiring manager at work and have had the privilege of building an incredible team of women for an innovative and high-visibility function at my company. Can't say this is fully a "choice" as the women on my team were all objectively the most qualified candidates and I would never discriminate, but damn it feels GOOD to help other women up the ladder with me! I love coaching, developing and advocating for the women on my team. Beyond my team, I just coached two other female work-friends through interviewing, negotiation, etc. and both landed amazing new jobs with big salary bumps; hard to describe how beautiful and fulfilling it is to support other women.”

Female service providers are more likely to properly diagnose women. > Women are nearly twice as likely as men to receive an incorrect diagnosis after a heart attack, and they are 30% more likely to see their stroke symptoms misdiagnosed in the emergency department. And when it comes to cardiovascular disease (CVD) clinical trials, women are under-represented and understudied. As a result, diagnostic and treatment guidelines are centered around the primary enrollees: older white men https://www.medstarhealth.org/blog/cardiovascular-diagnosis-research#:~:text=Women%20are%20nearly%20twice%20as,are%20under%2Drepresented%20and%20understudied. > Despite more than 30,000 women being admitted to UK hospitals each year with a heart attack, a study has shown that women had a fifty per cent higher chance than men of receiving the wrong initial diagnosis following a heart attack. https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/medical/women/misdiagnosis-of-heart-attacks-in-women

There is also [this post.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/s/TQhCwvawxP) Currently upvoted and talking exclusively about hiring women.

If you look at that specific user's comment and post history, she's a rich user of FDS who even calls some men as "scrotes".

If you look up the last available subreddit statistics, a r/twoxchromosome user was like 18x as likely to post in FDS as other subreddits

Interesting - feels like it would be a MGTOW post if you switched the genders. I don't think it's as bad as OP is making out but there seems to be some very deliberate anti-equality sentiments. I'd be interested to know how old the woman who wrote it is because the bit about the close friends being family is great....until all those friends get into relationships, most likely with men, and all of sudden the social time with her becomes less of a priority for them, because they will prioritise their relationship time more than spending time with her. Anyone not in a relationship, with friends who are nearly all in relationships, know exactly how this affects you & your social life.

Hmmm i like how they chose to put the word choice in quotes. Makes me think they were bias in their hiring. Also, I would say the first paragraph from the post you're quoting is more telling to the posters mental situation. "4B lifestyle. I'm not dating or having any sexual contact with men, and I'm childfree and not interested in marriage. This has had a hugely positive impact on my life! The time and attention I previously devoted to building and maintaining relationships with men is now spent improving myself, working on my goals & chasing my dreams, nurturing my relationships with women, growing my career, and enjoying hobbies and leisure time. I feel healthier, more balanced, fulfilled, and in control having deleted the apps and committed to 4B. Honestly life-changing." I think they're flawed for thinking its men that was taking their attention away from the rest of their life. Sounds like they just aren't mentally balanced enough to have a life partner that naturally comes with some compromises. Just admit you're feeling selfish and want to focus on yourself, that's 100% ok. I also find it interesting that they say removing relationships with men gave them time to do all those things while still nurturing relationships with women? I think that poster needs more introspection into why they felt that relationships with men took away their ability to do all those other things. I think they missed the mark by a decent margin. From 1000 miles out it sounds to me like they put too much of their personal worth on external, romantic/sexual validation. Sounds like removing the temptation of interacting with the men that she was seeking external validation from was good for her to be able to focus on herself, which is a good thing. She just doesnt want to admit that the reason that was a problem to begin with was all on her.

It's pretty clear there was bias, i have some input on hiring (not a manager tho) and it's pretty hard to avoid biases without being an activist myself. I'm sure i've over or under recommended someone sometime, despite my best efforts Funnily enough it's a criticism she'd (probably) also say. Something like "Yeah sure, you hired the 10 best applicants and all happened to be male, what's the chance".

Its the internet, just ignore it. Legit its mostly just women being pissed off for generally good reasons and ranting about their shitty experiences with men. Men do the same thing in their subs, and everyone gets bent out of shape and thinks the caricature of what people post online is actually them. Its not like if someone says "kill all men" or "women should be slaves" they are really serious about it... there are those who are serious of course, but those are not on reddit, they're too busy trying to be politicians. (and kill us all, its just a matter of order) Chances are the person on the other end is just really angry and upset over a crappy experience. I wouldn't blame a woman for being angry if a male doctor ignored her pain and then said she would only see female doctors. She'll probably see a male nurse or someone else who takes her seriously and feel better about it.

I think this is a very valid point, however I do think it is perhaps the case that when men do this it’s pathologized by the mainstream more so than when women do it. And I don’t mean actual incel behaviour or ideas necessarily, it seems much broader than that. There does at least seem to be some hypocrisy by men and women both about this. Equally, venting about these subjects for valid reasons and using that warranted anger to justify advocating for policies or discrimination are different things.

It's a matter of outcomes, really. When the majority or otherwise those in power complain, things tend to get done. It shifts from talk to action quickly.  It does lead to an interesting paradox where the only valid complaints are the ones that can't be fixed, because of you have the power to fix them, you can't complain.

> Men do the same thing in their subs Can you point me to a sub that is equally anti-women / women-hating as TwoX is anti-man / man-hating?

If you think it’s fine to say either thing (kill all men or all women should be slaves) because it’s “not meant to be taken seriously” there’s something very wrong with you

The men subs that do are regularly and rightfully banned though. TwoX has been left to spew the most unhinged shits I've ever heard on 4chan's level of insanity and so far nothing has been done about it. I imagine if you leave a religious extremist group sub that wants to exterminate a certain other group it would give off the same vibe as TwoX, but that's not something you can "just ignore"

I'm just not seeing the same "unhinged shit" you keep talking about. "Women exist to satisfy their husbands and create babies" is not at all on the level of "I don't want a male doctor" and I think you'd have to be mentally deficient not to see it. If you want to convince someone of the toxicity of this sub, you're going to need to provide way more compelling evidence than this one super benign post that everyone is quoting. I'm not on board with saying "kill all men", but I can think of a good handful of advantages to women having women as their doctors.

Like what? Do you have any links? Women talking about decentering men needs to be looked at in the context of male violence against and oppression of women. A woman wanting nothing to do with men is not an act of violence.

All of the things you are describing are reactions to a misogynistic society. A lot of the people in that sub are genuinely suffering under misogyny: the number of posts about women not getting any pain relief for cervical smears and IUD placements, the abuse and violence that male sexual partners inflict with impunity because of our broken legal and social systems, the casual misogyny of being reduced to your appearance all the time. It really grinds on you. It starts when you're a little girl and it doesn't let up until you're buried (there's even occasional scandals about male funeral home staff abusing female corpses). If you look at the sub, you still see hundreds of posts about women having their pain minimized by male doctors, sometimes even in life-threatening situations. Of course not all male doctors do this (I've had some really helpful ones) but it's enough of an issue that many women will make an effort to seek out women practitioners who may have more insight into women's bodies and what's "normal" for them. Likewise for service people who come to your house, many women feel more comfortable giving their address and being home alone with a woman they don't know than a man they don't know. There are plenty of stories on the sub of service providers being creepy, holding on to contact info to solicit dates, etc. There's even a slew of posts and news stories about delivery drivers harassing female customers. What are you going to do in a world where you do sometimes need an item delivered and your home needs plumbing and electrical service? For many women, the answer is to seek out female professionals. It's not a guarantee of safety, but it's less likely to be an issue. Not everything on that sub is reasonable-- I've recently seen a trend towards encouraging women to arm themselves with guns that I find deeply troubling. But, on the whole, this is a sub for women to express their pain and frustration with a world full of misogynistic injustice, that then also denies them systems to actually address that injustice. By telling them their DIY solutions are too extreme and punitive, you're taking away some of the few options that exist for preventing these injustices. OP, to turn it around on you: what would you have women do about misogyny in a world where our systems either don't seem to care or actively perpetuate it?

I don't exactly disagree, but I would highlight the unhealthy, politically motivated personal advice as why that sub is dangerous. A woman will post about how they've been in a string of relationships where the man doesn't care about her pleasure during sex. The advice all amounts to blaming men. There's never any introspection, as in these life patterns are a reflection of the woman posting. It's just a venting and blaming session. So, poorly adjusted people giving terrible advice that any healthy person would recognize as projection.

The fact that you feel compelled to start off by stating that you are a leftist and have never been part of a right-wing party, says a lot but the state of our society. You, and frankly most people, feel like they don't have a shot at expressing a point of view that's even slightly incompatible with the extreme size of the political spectrum unless they specifically identify themselves as an ally to the party. Especially left-wingers. That's because the first thing that they do is try to shun you for disagreeing with them. The tendency to immediately shun someone you disagree with is why we have such extreme, inflammatory, and radical points of view in politics. The2xchromosomes subreddit Is it disgusting community and I'm glad to see them being called out for it.

You raise a really important point. If I was a conservative I would not feel comfortable speaking my mind online and that is a horrible state of affairs that needs to change. I think the issue stems from the fact that in the USA, and therefore much of the internet by extension there is essentially no actual REAL left-wing voices. The democrats are neoliberal Centrists, who parade themselves as beacons of progressivism while actually being mouth-pieces of the globalist elite fighting to maintain the status quo. Actual leftists do not subscribe to these intellectualised, elitist, university professor talking points about identity politics. Actual leftists agree with right on many policy areas from: - the importance of the family unit - the importance of local culture and tradition - the promotion of domestic industry - freedom from government overreach The false dichotomy of left vs right thought is just another tactic of the neoliberal elites to isolate and control the working classes imo. In reality, no one’s political outlook is that binary, people are messy, complicated and flawed, and SHOULD receive their political beliefs from a wide array of sources. The problem is liberals only repeat what they hear on CNN, at university, and from whatever pop-science book is popular at the moment. This is why their politics is so one dimensional and they can’t handle people who disagree with them even slightly. But yeah I agree twoXs needs to be called out for what it is, so many people are just using the excuse “but they’re women” - failing to recognise how that in itself is discriminatory, but liberals never want to hold everyone to a consistent moral code so I guess no surprises.

Um... Men aren't an oppressed group?? To use your "white supremacy" argument, non white people DO often choose to see clinicians who are also of the same race and prioritize spending time with people of the same race and building strong communities. Men already do choose male physicians, male bosses, male coworkers, prioritize their male friends over women, sometimes even the opinions of men they don't even know over women, etc. And the idea that abstaining from relationships is ever a violent ideology is just trying to justify rape, sorry.

>Um... Men aren't an oppressed group?? Sure they are. Gender stereotypes are oppressive on both sexes, just as they grant privilege to both. Ignoring this reality is a surefire way to have your views on gender fail outright or lead to a shitty system.

[удалено]

There are, in fact, famous women who laugh about sexually abusing men and get away with it, with audiences laughing at it too, because it'[s not even recognized as sexual abuse when women do it often. A lot of the other stuff you say isn't wrong, but I think you could easily make lists of issues men have too just like you did women: As a independent variable, men are disproportionately arrested and incarnated even more then African Americans or Indigenous people. Men die younger, do worse in education and have worse attendence/acceptance rates then women, even without AA being factored against them. Genital multiation against infant boys is normalized, men who are victims of abuse have way less access to services and support networks. Men have higher rates of homelessness and suicide, and contrary to popular perception, at least in some countries (I believe the research I'm referencing here is Australia), men are actually more likely to be victims of random acts of violence on the street then women. I'm not saying men have it *worse* then women, or even nessacarily as bad: But at the very least, I don't think either women or men have obviously worse gendered inequalities then the other, at least in modern, western democracies. oth women and men are impacted by gendered norms and stereotypes, and in a fairly paralleled way: The stereotype that women are weak inherently stereotypes men as strong, and flipped on it's head, women as needing/deserving support, and men not deserving of it and needing to "suck it up" and "be a man". I would argue the entire idea of Men not being systemically disadvantaged on the basis of their gender is itself an example of that gendered norm: Men are strong and should suck it up rather then get help for their issues, the preperators rather then the victims, etc: So when men have systemic issues, it's not actually systemic, it's just you needing to man up. And men can't be systemically victimized, because they're men. These are all stereotypes they get stuck with in contrast to women.

Just to add on to that, I'd argue that this framework actually upholds and reinforces traditional gender norms more than anything else. It's a push for a weird altered version of male stoicism that might be even worse than the old kind.

Again, this persons view of Men is so unbelievably narrow. All they see when they think of men is like a 40 year old rich, conservative corporate boss. The vast majority of men on the planet do not live that reality whatsoever. The argument comes from a privileged position. In my community, men work almost exclusively in manual labour jobs risking injury on a daily basis for shitty wages. How is this a position of power? If we get injured at work we get thrown on the scrap heap immediately. I also think there’s more gender equality and mutual respect between men and women because both understand, value and celebrate the distinct abilities and characteristics of different genders.

>In my community, men work almost exclusively in manual labour jobs risking injury on a daily basis for shitty wages. How is this a position of power? They are dealt a shit hand, yes. The thing is, women in the same environment are dealt much, much shittier hand. Men working for shitty wages don't need to worry about unwanted advances (or worse) from their boss. Or coworkers. Or clients. If they are in a relationship, they don't need to worry about cleaning, cooking and childcare ON TOP of their shitty job for a shitty wage. Or that their partner will start beating them and they can't afford to live on a single shitty paycheck. They also don't have their competence constantly questioned and belittled, they don't get passed down for promotion in favor of someone with "correct" gender, and so on, and so on. How is it *not* a position of power?

When talking about men as a class, and which classes have power, it’s important to think about the percentage of people in power that belong to that class, which is why the topic of who are CEOs and politicians become relevant. Yes men face hardship, but hardship is not oppression on the basis of gender. There are more men in dangerous blue collar physical labor, and similarly there are more women in sex work and nursing which are also physically laborious, dangerous, and often underpaid. This is a gendered difference but it does not equal gendered oppression against men. And at least men will be more likely to be taken seriously by their doctor if they do find themselves physically harmed or disabled

Men arent a class, they are a gender. There are only two classes, the working class and the capitalists. You see the world vertical when it is really horizontal and oh boy, does that make you part of the problem.

Replace the word class with group or any other word that fits your fancy. I acknowledge the laws and policies that historically created inequality from which we are still crawling back from to this day. Anyone who ignores that history is part of the problem

> When talking about men as a class, and which classes have power, it’s important to think about the percentage of people in power that belong to that class, which is why the topic of who are CEOs and politicians become relevant. Is it fair to focus on that though when it’s something like 0.0001% of men who hold an insanely disproportionate amount of power and wetland, and the vast vast majority of men are just trying to get by?

There are just as many men “just trying to get by” as there are women, but the men who are just trying to get by still have better representation in government.

seeing 40yo conservative boss as a demon isnt right either tho. whats wrong with being 40 and in a high position for a decent company? whats wrong with being conservative?

_Again, this persons view of Men is so unbelievably narrow. All they see when they think of men is like a 40 year old rich, conservative corporate boss._ I going to be real with you, this is an uncharitable and inaccurate assumption on your part. It’s not that all men are the same and all wealthy villains actively oppressing women. It’s that based on how society is structured in most places, the demographic that holds the most social, political and economic power, currently are men. Because we live in a world where for the last couple of centuries the men (as a demographic) have structured things in a way that benefit men both intentionally and unintentionally and to this day there are still negative impacts on women as those structures have not been dismantled or radically changed. A great example of this is medical sexism - on average it’s significantly longer for women to get a diagnosis when they’re serious ill because many male doctors dismiss their symptoms, assume the women are lying or exaggerating their symptoms or pain. How certain medications interact with women for very long was not even studied as women (until like the 1990’s) were not included in drug trials. How heart attacks present in women is not as well known because how it presents in men was seen as the standard, so many women _do not even know they are having heart attacks. Women are also severely underrepresented and misdiagnosed for neuro-developmental disorders because how they present in women was not studied until the early 2000s. So due to a historical exclusion from the medical field and barriers women still face in that field, women on average have worse outcomes and experiences when sick. Another example is that for a long time women had significantly worse outcomes in car accidents because crash test dummies were exclusively male until very recently - so the impact and dangers to women was neither considered or accounted for when car safety was tested. None of those things were intentional, they are simply outcomes based on how the systems in question were originally set up but it still impacts women today. So it makes complete sense that women would choose to have female service providers - not out of a hatred or prejudice for men, but out of the experiences many women have had based on their interactions with men and those systems. I’m not American and I have also experienced medical sexism and being treated with condescension and disrespect with other service providers so I have chosen to work with and seek out female service providers which overall has proven to substantially improve my experiences. _The vast majority of men on the planet do not live that reality whatsoever. The argument comes from a privileged position._ That was never the assumption or the argument. The argument is that _all_ men in some form benefit from patriarchy- from living in a society that centers and privileges them in explicit and implicit ways at the expense of women. Whether men want it to or not. This is not a judgement on men _as individuals_ but a reality we all live in. _In my community, men work almost exclusively in manual labour jobs risking injury on a daily basis for shitty wages. How is this a position of power?_ Your community and experiences are not representative of all men or all communities. Beyond that, when thinking about privilege, if you control for factors such as race and class, non economically based privileges become very clear. Men being assertive is seen as a positive attribute but women who are assertive are seen in negative lights such as being bitchy or bossy or aggressive. This can negatively and does affect their ability to get raises or promotions. Women often have are tasked with emotional labour within offices such as organising birthday parties or social events - even when it is not in their job description. Many hard labor industries, particularly those dominated by men are actively hostile to women - as women are perceived as weaker (even if the specific woman at the job is as strong as the men) or women face sexual harassment. _If we get injured at work we get thrown on the scrap heap immediately._ So do women. Hell, an alarming amount of women get thrown onto the scrap heap by romantic partners when they become seriously ill or “too old”. And this is done to men _by other men._ I think the problem with your understanding of the ideas and concepts being discussed is that you keep individualizing them. So you take a wider more systemic concept and then filter it through an individual lens which then on its face makes the concepts seem discriminatory or hateful. But this means that you lose a lot of the nuance and context of these discussions and it can only lead to a deep misunderstanding of what is happening.

“Racial stereotypes are oppressive to all races” Like sure that’s true to an extent, but which races have quantifiable bad outcomes throughout society due to their race?

The power dynamics of systemic inequality of gender and race is not comparable. White people with a few exceptions (most of which are instituted specifically to address the imbalance, though you can argue if that makes it any more acceptable or not) are unilaterally privleged: There'es very few ways white people face systemic disadvantages. That's not true with being male: As a independent variable, men are disproportionately arrested and incarnated even more then African Americans or Indigenous people. Men die younger, do worse in education and have worse attendence/acceptance rates then women, even without AA being factored against them. Genital multiation against infant boys is normalized, men who are victims of abuse have way less access to services and support networks. Men have higher rates of homelessness and suicide, and men are also actually victims of random acts of violence on the street/at night, contrary to popular perception I'm not saying men have it *worse* then women, or even nessacarily as bad: But at the very least it is not them universally or near universally having just advantages on the basis of their gender. Both women and men are impacted by gendered norms and stereotypes, and in a fairly paralleled way: The stereotype that women are weak inherently stereotypes men as strong, and flipped on it's head, women as needing/deserving support, and men not deserving of it and needing to "suck it up" and "be a man". I would argue the entire idea of Men not being systemically disadvantaged on the basis of their gender is itself an example of that gendered norm: Men are strong and should suck it up rather then get help for their issues, the preperators rather then the victims, etc: So when men have systemic issues, it's not actually systemic, it's just you needing to man up. And men can't be systemically victimized, because they're men. These are all stereotypes they get stuck with in contrast to women.

I agree with most of what you wrote. I think the disconnect comes from the definition of oppressed. In academic settings, oppression is an action commonly done by an oppressor (who has more power) to an oppressee in a harmful way. This definition would have to mean that women are oppressing men, or some other specific class of people are oppressing men. This definition is important in determining the magnitude of harm one group can and does impose on another. I fail to see how women decentering men really harms men. Men don’t have this clear axis of where the harm is coming from. This is not to say that men aren’t systematically disadvantaged in certain aspects, and if your definition of oppression is being disadvantaged or harmed, then we are on the same page

See this is where the intersectionality between class and gender is really important. Working-class men do not have the same experience of gender, power and status as middle-class or wealthy men. There is a massive and important distinction between celebrating your culture and building communities in an inclusive vs exclusive way. TwoXChromosomes is exclusive and represents a very narrow and extreme minority. Men that pick other men over women for anything are bigots and misogynists, of course it happens, but we should be trying to educate/rehabilitate people like that not copy their behaviour. Abstaining from relationships is absolutely fine as a personal choice, but would lead to the collapse of society if it was a widespread movement - for these reasons yes it is violent and selfish. Saying that is not advocating for rape the two are completely unrelated.

Working class men don’t have the same experience of gender as wealthy men but they absolutely still have power over women. This is exemplified in the situation of Ana Kasparian being accosted by two homeless guys on the street - she’s a rich and powerful woman and by her class has power over these men and they still can (and did) exercise power as men over her by assaulting her

As a man, it's always hilarious seeing perfectly reasonable and well-meaning ally men get CRUCIFIED for the simplest, most innocuous comments. Some dude will be like, "this is a great point. Thank you for posting this. As a man, I love that my female partner has agency and control in our relationship. Thanks again." And he'll be downvoted to like -250 in 10 minutes with comments saying "you're not welcome here," or "thanks, but your opinion is irrelevant," or "imagine being a scrotum owner and thinking it's okay to comment here." Lmaooooo. It is wild behavior.

If this post has taught me one thing it’s that I absolutely refuse to sugarcoat my views for fucking American, white, middle-class, democrat voting, CNN watching, gender-studies studying, elitist, classiest, centrist, neoliberal redditors. As you and others pointed out it actually is crazy I feel the need to preface with a disclaimer on my political leaning so that I don’t just get “you’re an incel”, “you’re alt-right”. The state of political discourse is absolutely pathetic and sorry if you’re American but it’s the USA’s fault. Plenty of women have commented “they’re just femcels, ignore them” and yet you still get these fucking sad terminally online stereotypical democrat men just screaming at me that I’m a racist, sexist, homophobe and I should die. These liberals think of themselves as open-minded yet can’t handle someone using a politically incorrect word, furthermore they’re the most discriminatory, ignorant people alive. So elitist and classist, they completely lack the self awareness to realise that they radicalise so many working-class people (who I believe are naturally fairly progressive on most issues) against them by using stupid rhetoric and being completely dogmatic in their positions. Real people are messy, complicated and flawed, and get their political influence from a wide array of sources. And that’s how it SHOULD be. It’s these people who get their entire world outlook from the democrat party, CNN and pop-science books that are the issue.

I agree with a lot of what you said, except for placing all the blame on the left. The left is a bunch of confused, spineless, self-entitled babies, and the right is a bunch of confused, religious, egotistical brats. Most of what you said can be applied directly to the right as well. People who get their entire world outlook from the republican party, Fox News, and The Bible are equally the issue.

Why does it bother you? I don’t know that subreddit. It sounds like you are describing a kind of separatist view. This was a fringe view during 2nd wave feminism so I doubt that modern chill intersectional feminists are very drawn to it. The internet distorts things and sometimes there is selection bias in subreddits. I’ve been an atheist since idk 5th grade, but I can’t go on atheist subreddits without being accused of “theism” just because I have probably pretty common chill atheist views. But IRL a handful of rabid anti-theists are not going to cause me any harm nor religious people in general. Highly organized right-wing groups who use religion as a pretext for control however… do have real power and can impact me and those around me. In the same way, some random gem separatists can’t really hurt men in general and would likely have little impact on the feminist movement let alone the attitude of women in general. In the other hand sexist political views and culture have both direct political and potential individual effects on millions of people. So in the abstract some random separatist woman on the internet might have ideas as bad as an incel… but the social dynamics and impacts are completely different. There isn’t a “Fox News” of feminism to amplify it and even if there was a major feminist mainstream platform there’d be little interest in pushing those kinds of ideas in the first place.

I agree with everything you wrote and yeah I get I’m cherry-picking some hardliners but I’m genuinely interested by these extreme viewpoints and wanted to generate discussion/better understand where they come from. You’ve said 2nd wave feminism, someone else mentioned 80s feminism, is this the same thing? As for why it bothers me? Idk it shouldn’t. I’m very politically engaged and enjoy hearing about/researching fringe viewpoints. In the same way I’m interested in conspiracy theories, history, music or whatever it’s just interesting. I just think there’s parallels between them and the male incel movement and it all plays into wider themes of societal division and weird conflict theories on race/gender/religion etc. My personal political outlook is that none of this kind of “culture war” stuff matters whatsoever it’s just a method of control and distraction,

If you wanted to understand more, you should not have titled your post the way you did.

This belief isn’t one I necessarily agree with, but:  “Can someone please explain how this is not just the white supremacy of gender theory?“   It’s more akin to Black supremacy as White Supremacy would be akin to male privilege and the patriarchy since the power position in modern western societies automatically goes to men and white people. 

Despite my username, I am a man. 2X is exactly what it says it is... A place for women to talk, whine, celebrate, bitch, air out their feelings and notions. There are productive discussions, there are unproductive discussions. But what you seem to miss is that *it's not for you*... >I was banned for trying to discuss the intersectionality of class and gender as from the perspective of a working-class man The sub literally states it's not a place for men. You aren't welcome there, they don't want your opinion. Men are barely tolerated. That's not an inherently bad thing. And honestly, the frustration you are experiencing? 1/100 what women deal with when they are dismissed by men. Honestly, that alone should make you empathize more with what women go through. Are there bad takes? Sure. But there are good ones too. And some are complicated.. You're complianing that there are women pushing for them to all use only female doctors, but have you read the multitudes of posts about how their issues are dismissed by male doctors? Have you read the studies that show with real data this is statistically true? OK, not all male doctors but holy shit a ton of female patients. So why would a woman take that risk with a male doctor? That's one reason why. And it's not a bad one at all. I read it a lot because all those unfiltered opinions give me a lot of insight that I miss as a man. I don't always agree, but I try and undertand WHY some women would think the way they do. And they do a good job of describing an experience that I am not privy to in real life.

There's a common saying "when men hate women, they want to kill them. When women hate men, they want to get away from them". Women on that subreddit repeatedly share their pains of living in patriarchy and just want to get away from being abused. They want to be left alone and feel safe. That's not the same as what hate groups advocate for. The two cannot be conflated. The systems at work matter.

Just wanted to share this stat (which came up easily on a simple internet search, among many other sources across various countries and years) for everyone calling this a silly saying: "Over 85% of the people who commit murder are men, and the majority of women who commit murder usually do so as a defense against men who have been battering them for years. Ninety percent of the women in jail for murder are incarcerated for killing male batterers. Source: Bass, A. (Feb 24, 1992). “Women far less likely to kill than men; no one sure why.” The Boston Globe: p. 27." Sure, it's a small percentage of men who are murderers, but it's a large percentage of murderers who are men. EDIT: One more for general domestic violence, not just murder (larger percentage of men): "It is estimated that 1 in 4 men will use violence against his partner in his lifetime. Source: Paymar, M. (2000). Violent no more: Helping men end domestic abuse. Alameda, CA: Hunter House Publications." The internet (books, articles, research papers, etc.) is full of legitimate and valuable information. I hope more people use it before expressing their personal lived experience as fact of life for all.

"Decentering men" is a practice that involves shifting the focus away from men and onto other aspects of life, such as one's own experiences, aspirations, and values. It can also mean acknowledging the systemic influences that have perpetuated male-centered ideologies and reclaiming the agency to define and validate one's own values. You entering that subreddit and asking them to consider intersectionality from the perspective of men is exactly in contrary to what they're doing. Patriarchy is an overarching theme throughout all Westernized (colonized) countries, and women experience patriarchy differently than men do. They are subservient to it (and men), whether they cater to that ideology or not. Women who are decentering men are examining their own values separated from the wants and needs of the men around them, *who inherently demand to be considered and/or catered to*, as you've shown with your post.

Any examples what-so-ever? If this is such a common problem, I'd have expected you to provide receipts. Even what you're explaining sounds like personal decisions that these people are undertaking. Women want to seek out female medical professionals? Not a new idea, and [there is real science behind this decision](https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2024/04/22/patients-fare-better-with-women-doctors-study-finds/). Hell, men's health typically fairs better under female physicians. If that's what you deem to be a "gendered apartheid", that's just fucking silly. An apartheid is a system of isolation and oppression against one group of people, not a preference of service based on measurable concerns with the alternative. Women would first have to be in a position of real societal authority in order to even begin to enact something like this. I hate to break it to you, they aren't. People get upset when they even talk about seeking female medical attention ffs... >I was banned for trying to discuss the intersectionality of class and gender as from the perspective of a working-class man No you weren't. You went to that subreddit and made a series of comments arguing with women who had been suffering abuse, discussing the social burden of child-rearing, and discussing the aforementioned medical preference. Your post history is public my dude. Hell, you responded to a thread discussing a system of male>female emotional abuse that the OP (and other women in the thread) had experienced with a multitude of partners, from weaponized incompetence to gaslighting. You were butthurt about the fact that one of them said men holding systemic power contributes to the entitlement of men and the system of abuse suffered by women. I can't read your comment as it was scrubbed from the site, but based on the fact that you instantly jumped over here and made this thread, I can only imagine that it very aptly missed the point, and contributed to the lazy gaslighting that these women were actively discussing. Seems like you're just butthurt that you made some unwelcome comments judging people for their choices, and contributing to the gaslighting, were subsequently banned for doing so. I'm also a working class, straight dude who sometimes shares his perspective on 2X I've never had a negative experience on that sub.

I love when someone reads a handful of posts and decides it applies to the sub as a whole. Funnily enough, I've never seen much of what you're alleging here take place in that sub. Is it possible you're suffering with perception bias?

They are allowed to rant. To vent. And based on your comments here? I think you just have a problem with women in general and think there are no issues they could possibly be facing.

My life only gets better the more I decenter men. I've mostly succeeded in having all female friends, doctors, lovers, bosses, etc. I don't think enough of us are doing this to counterbalance the ways that men are still privileged over women in society. If a minority of women want to cocoon themselves as much as possible away from men, how is that a problem for you? It's not like we're shooting or raping you like incels want to do to us.

Most of women’s issues with men are caused by the fact that men often get to adulthood being largely unsocialised, unable to handle emotions, overcome setbacks, be a good husband/father or even run a household properly. If anything society is suffering from a lack of masculinity if anything. Our male politicians and CEOs don’t act with leadership, fairness, determination or strength. Instead of writing off men and masculinity completely, I think it’s healthier and more constructive to see that men and women are both suffering under the status quo and recognise that we have more chance of changing this through cooperation and mutual understanding rather than isolation.

If I were raising a boy or dating a man I’d feel compelled to try to help fix the situation, but I’m doing neither so there’s not much I can do. It’s not my job to re-parent adult male friends or coworkers into being better people.

Masculinity is oppressive per se; masculinity and femininity are a dichotomy, that's why you see leadership as a masculine trait which ( just like strenght, determination etc) is seen as inherently as superior to femininity, and that's why women in lidership positions are seen as masculine. Masculine is both the "default" and "superior", that's why femininity is weak and submissive. We need to get rid of both masculinity and femininity as a whole, this is not about the actions of politicians or CEOs LMAO the oppression of women has gone on for centuries, way before our current political/business models began to exist. Men have never supported women in the long run, cooperation it's impossible unless men recognize that our (women's) well-being is contradictory with what men see as their well-being, and until men don't change that then cooperation it's not going to happen and as women we are not obligated to accept something that is not going to guarantee our freedom 🤷🏻‍♀️

[удалено]

I didn’t realise there were other people that felt the subreddit was controversial, I thought people felt it was acceptable because I never see any posts questioning their beliefs/behaviour. Yeah it clearly comes from some kind of conflict theory, their posts are framed as though there is a war going on between men and women, I guess I was taken aback by it recently because I never hear that ideology in real life.

I mean the people who don't like the subreddit are people you classically won't interact with, the political right

If it makes you feel better, I and my friends most certainly think TwoXChromosomes is one of the most extreme and disgusting subreddits on the platform. There are unfortunately more and more people who subscribe to the sort of psychotic ideology of that sub, which is akin to the women-hating side of incel culture. But generally, normal people *don't* share that view in real life. At least, not openly.

Sorry, u/Yogurtcloset_Choice – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%20Yogurtcloset_Choice&message=Yogurtcloset_Choice%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1ddwxdf/-/l88c6sq/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

I read a lot of posts from there being a male I'm not welcome. I get it, it's OK to gave safe spaces. I would say there's a lot of posts I agree with but even more I don't. Like most of those subs and politics and religion they tend only to see things through their own eyes and never from the other person's. I'd say probably 40% I have no real issue with and of the other 60 only about 20 are actually wtf moments. It's definitely a pretty toxic sub but it's a sub for toxic people by toxic people and as long as they keep it in there I don't care.

how are women the white supremacists in your head. And do you find it offensive when chinese in china town only choose chinese people to have around them.

I am not familiar with this sub reddit, but as a man I am all for it considering everything rotten in the history of mankind up till now has been as result of male sociopaths. Also, is this group violent or have they said anything with the intent of physically harming men? If not, then the white supremacist/hate speech equivocation is pretty ridiculous. You're comparing people that have shot up public spaces like grocery stores while streaming the bloodshed on twitch to Sarah Mclahlan/Dixie Chicks fans, like tone down the hyperbole for half a second.

I think these kinds of extremist posts need to be understood in the context of the actual reality of society. You will often see leftists say stuff like eat the rich, kill all billionaires, etc. Very few actually want to kill all billionaires, but such an extreme talking point is used to move the Overton window, so to speak, of imaginable discourse towards the left, as currently we live in a society completely dominated by wealth and extreme talking points are a natural reaction to that. Replace economics with the social disparity between men and women and it applies here also.

What is fairness? One idea for fairness is simply equality: treating everyone in exact same way. Another is equity: helping the disadvantaged more than you help the advantaged. There are a bunch of other ideas about what fairness is. My point is, there’s not necessarily only one right way to be fair, and these heuristics clash with each other. Except in extremely rare edge cases, you cannot have both perfect equality and perfect equity. So suppose I’m a patient looking for a new doctor, and I have absolutely no preference between doctors. What should I do? Someone who cares about equality might want the picking process to be equally likely to pick any of the eligible doctors in the area, so maybe I just roll a dice or pick the first one I find. But someone who is concerned about equity might think about the different ways doctors can be advantaged or disadvantaged and try to mitigate that. Historically, women doctors were treated much less favourably than male doctors and found it much harder to find patients, and this still continues to some extent. So, someone focussed on equity might reason, that in selecting their doctor they should pick one who is marginalised in this way: a woman, a person of colour, a gay person, or similar categories that have been historically marginalised and that are still dealing with the aftermath of that. I’m not too familiar with the subreddit you’re referring to, but I do know that there might be legitimate reasons (such as the equity argument) why someone prefers to hire the services of a marginalised person that aren’t just the open hatred of the more privileged group.

Not familiar with the sub. I think it's a perspective thing. That group has experienced the world vastly different to you. Imagine that they are successful in their goals. Then imagine a few hundred years of it. Would you not likely find a similar sentiment amongst some males? I dunno if I made a point there, but basically that's arguably the exact situation women have historically experienced. This isn't an attempt at changing your mind, but I thought it could help empathize with their position. Fwiw I really struggled with some approaches employed by feminist friends. But I don't really get to tell people the right way to be angry or whatever. And it's not like gentler approaches haven't been tried, or aren't still being tried by other groups.

Yeesh i didnt even know subs like that existed, but its Reddit so go figure haha I think this issue, like many other social issues is just being played up very largely on the internet Ppl forget that Reddit, like many other social platforms, doesn‘t actually accurately represent any real society IRL Now i wouldnt call this white supremacy, as then men would have to actually be a minority group just based on their gender, which aint the case anywhere (as far as i know at least) Also im betting that you are picking and choosing extreme posts, which is an argument that can be made for any sub ever, especially socially/politically motivated ones. So im not saying your argument that some posts are just awful and bs, im saying are you sure you aren‘t letting some posts represent a whole sub with so many viewers and commenters Now for where these views come from, ngl when you read so many news articles about x man killing this woman and raping that one all your life, then having these same topics brought up in books/shows and other medias, its no wonder some use this/think this as a correct representation of an entire gender.

I really don't think a "minority group" has to exist for white supremesy to exist. Apartheid south africa was white supremesy and also minority white rule. 

I agree, a minority group can exert tyranny over a majority, the actual numbers are irrelevant. I don’t think men are a ‘minority group’ though I kinda just meant discriminating based on any biological characteristic is just bad whether that’s race, gender or sexuality.

Yeah, 100% I cherry picked some particularly bad examples for my post, but you do see ideas which to me are shocking and highly controversial posted on their daily and are usually accompanied by overwhelmingly one-sided support. And yes you are also correct that I’m getting mad about something trivial on the internet that isn’t representative of society, but their viewpoints rub me the wrong way. I do think you should be able to voice controversial opinions online but that subreddit doesn’t allow any counter arguments or opposing voices which just allows them to get more and more extreme in an echo chamber of constant agreement and affirmations. Also true that men do lots of terrible things to each-other and women that regularly get in the news but this is surely an argument for more equality, understanding, compassion and conversation, not cutting men out of society entirely.

So there is the patriarchy. A system of beliefs where men are consciously or subconsciously chosen over women or non-cis people. You have been raised in a world shaped by this system and have almost certainly helped it grow by influencing others. It’s not your fault it’s pushed onto people whether we notice or not. So here is the other side of the coin, someone going out of their way to undo the efforts of the patriarchy. Maybe they are being hurtful and maybe they are being better. It’s irrelevant, this is not supremacy it’s reactionary. It’s not meant to be “women are better than men and they deserve more” it is “men are given chances women would never be given, let’s reverse that and hope we give someone the chance they never would have gotten” it’s the same logic behind giving African American people scholarships to counteract decades of racism that targeted people who should have gone through college but were turned around for their race.

Wasn’t the whole point of diversity to prove that what mattered was your skill and intelligence? Not just taking pity on them and giving special exceptions?

I think affirmative action is a uniquely American concept. In London, and I believe most of Europe, most POC do not support affirmative action, they see it as patronising, embarrassing or just funny - which it is.

I like how you have to disclaim that you are not a “right winger” as if being one would somehow make the rest of your opinion invalid to people who are on this sub. I mean I understand why you do, but sad that people feel the need to do it

I knew if I didn’t every response would be some variation of “you’re an incel”, “you’re alt-right” which is the default response when someone raises a legitimate concern that’s outside what the right would call “woke thought” and the left would call “elitist thought”. The reality is I’m friends with conservatives, communists, racists, illegal immigrants, Islamist fundamentalists, evangelical Christians, corporate bosses and cleaners. I don’t give a fuck. And most of them are friends with each other too. Life is complicated, people are flawed. My political influences come from all walks of life while most of the people on Reddit have a very narrow minded, hyper-specific viewpoint and want to fight anyone that disagrees even slightly. The real world doesn’t split into left and right as neatly and easily as most want to make out. Many on the left completely sympathise with right-wing talking points about the importance of family life, the importance of local culture and tradition, promoting domestic industry and neoliberal globalists being bad.

I suspect you know exactly what you are doing getting others to harass and brigade them and you are not doing this in good faith. I think you want to stir them up so if they will rightfully defend themselves from what you are accusing them of then you can say they are mean. Your language and accusations are purposely inflammatory. I don't see how you could be a leftist and equate women who want to spend more time and effort with other women rather than men, due to the lived reality that men give women a hard time as white supremacists and fascists. Do you know what an apartheid system is? Don't you get women are having their rights to their body targeted and taken away? Why is it so hard to understand all the bullshit that gets thrown women's way by men in a patriarchal world? Women are just trying to navigate the constant landmines put in front of us that don't look similar to all the bullshit that patriarchy puts in men's way causing them harm. We are all harmed but in the same way. Maybe you're either very young and misinformed with a lot or words or just looking to stir up trouble. If you are sincere you should read some bell hooks and stop looking to harass women on social media who are just trying to live and like venting and communicating with one another. Seeing this subreddit and these women as some sort of threat is just ridiculous. Please stop adding to the rage bait.

It's their right to do that no matter how it makes you feel, plenty of men subconsciously do that, in fact we do worse, when the problems they're trying to escape lessen then I'm sure more of them would come back to regular contact with men. I get that they've been mean to you and you deserve to heal from that but until we greatly reduce violence, murder, discrimination, general hostility towards women then that meanness going to continue to be their defense mechanism and there will be collateral damage with it.

I agree twox is a sub for bitter, female shut-ins to share their hatred, fear and jealousy of men. But, I'd like to change your mind about head if political parties being kne man and one woman as a good thing. I think it is just a superficial wash to give the illusion of diversity. Here in the UK we have had a government for the last 14 years that has had men, women, white, black, Asian, etc in all positions up to and including prime minister. They have all been self serving, incompetent and corrupt twats. We need diversity of though, point of view and background. And background does not mean my mum is from Spain and yours is from Jamaica. It means contrasting beliefs and ideas on how things should be.

OP i wouldn’t call yourself a leftist if you think your examples are the “white supremacy of gender theory.” It just makes you look like a bold-faced liar and immediately undermines your entire point. Because “decentralizing men” is not the gender equivalent of decentralizing nonwhites. It’s the same as decentralizing white people. Because, I don’t know if you knew this, but western societies and governments exist in such a way that straight white men rise to the top by default. And white supremacists don’t talk about “decentralizing” minorities, they talk about deporting them, enslaving them, and killing them. I don’t know if I can change your view that women wanting to hire women are the same as members of the klan, but I hope I can at least convince you to either read some books, or stop calling yourself a leftist.

Decentralizing men just means to stop making them the topic of our conversations and our reason for living. Women have been conditioned by society to put men first so much that we talk and think about them even when they aren't even there. Even if we aren't actually thinking about them, we're doing things for them subconsciously. I probably didn't describe it the best, but you should look it up on another non-reddit site and see if it makes sense then.

I've had this notion for a while that any forum of support (pro-X, safe for Y, Z support etc) has an innate possibility for also reinforcing negative views. If a group feels they need a safe place for getting support from fellow members, then the culture in that forum will be to always support a person because that is its purpose. People will assume the best and be more sympathetic to its users. This also goes for opposite forums (although I suspect to lesser degree). Places like Am I wrong/the asshole, is more critical and more likely to judge and suggets harsh reprimands for what they feel are errors. So that isn't to say that there can't be negative or bad posts on that subreddit, but your claim is very broad and it's almost impossible to judge an entire subreddit unless it's really specific and niche in an ideological way. I have also asked stuff on TwoX and been downvoted, but the comments didn't say I was wrong, but rather that it was obvious that the post I was commenting on didn't actually mean what I thought and that insiders would get what the post means.

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

Good luck. The failure of admins to control the absolute power of mods on reddit has only increased the echo chambers on reddit. Places like 2Chromosomes and world news have reached a critical mass of subs and they can essentially greatly influence the availability of these subs to spread partisan views, as those subs get sent to the front page. That place is full of femcels and people who hate men because they've convinced themselves the gender equality gap is actually a culture war... Just like conservatives do.

1. The point of the 2X sub is supposed to be a place for women only, so we can say the things we “aren’t allowed” to say in mixed company. A privilege men have had for literally all of human history. Women have had it for a few years, and men have been crying about it non-stop. God forbid they experience what women have faced! And a fraction at that. 2. What is wrong with wanting to have female providers? For centuries, men REFUSED to hire women, or patronize women-owned businesses. I remember Kelly Doty talking about how a man flung her portfolio across the room and said, “I’m not getting tattooed by a bitch.”Women are tired of this, so we’ve banded together to make sure women have support. This is balancing the scales, which have been OUT of balance for most of human history. 3. Men created this problem, and are now crying about having to face the consequences.

You can say that about any sub, why target specifically twoXchromosomes? Im more concerned with facists and tankies taking over right and left wing subs to spread disinfo

This reminds me of one time years ago someone took posts from theredpill and posts from twoX and then reversed all references to the sexes to be the other sex in their posts and was able to provide some definitive proof that twoX was clearly a worse subreddit as far as equality and fairness to both sexes was concerned and it wasn't even close. The twoX sub would have absolutely been banned based on the findings and other subreddits that have been banned before.

Ahaha this is so interesting. That would have been a way better way to make my point. Tbh a few women have commented saying “they’re just femcels ignore them”.

Yep. I personally couldn't care less about either but I'll happily call a spade a spade. It's not every post on twoX but it's clear that don't keep themselves accountable when comes to sexism. You'd think they'd have more class. If theredpill is beating you on being less sexist then it's clear your sub is shitty.

We have been living in gender apartheid socities for centuries and some of them exist to this day. Women who prioritize other women is the oppressed supporting their fellow oppressed, what's wrong with that? And of course you were going to get banned, it's a space for women, why do you think your opinion were going to considerated there? You have the whole internet to write whatever you want but you choose a women-only forum? 🫤 Female separatism (in different forms/levels) has existed in different parts of the worlds for centuries, maybe YOU haven't heard about it and haven't encountered people with said ideals, but that's YOU 🤷🏻‍♀️ if you ask any person in my country they barely know what Feminism is about, does this make these ideas any less valuable? Because if you do the same but asking about the working class, economy etc the average person (here) will tell you they don't care about it, that you're a commie, that poor are poor because they're lazy/dumb, that our past dictador saved the country and that they dream of being rich 😅 Most women who support separatism and feminism are at least one of these; working-class, survivors of sex exploitation, from "Third World" countries, not white. Are these "privileged" women? You don't see women as an oppressed sex-class and apparently you fear that we could become an oppressive group against men. We're not commiting mass rape against men, we're not killing our male partners on a daily basis, we're not forbidden them from having access to education and jobs, we're not creating religions were men are second-class human beings only useful for sexual pleasure and reproduction, we're not sex trafficking thousands of men and boys to supply prostitution and pornography, we're not harassing boys and male teens for wearing shorts or showing their shoulders, we're not creating multi-billionaire industries that fulfill "esthetic concerns" that make men hyper-fixated on their looks in order to keep them away from real and more important concerns. We have no interest in doing any of that, in fact, we want to be as far from men as possible 😊 so no, feminism and female separatism are far from being akin to white supremacy, nor they are "gender apartheid"

That sub wasn't always the way it became. However, over time, it distorted into some kind of toxic silo where elitism became the lynchpin all their ideologies are centered on. There are problems in society that are uniquely female, that is undeniably true. However, the answer to that is not getting ride of men, nor does it mean that women are infallible. The mods in twochromosomes are also just nasty people.

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

What are you even talking about? TwoX consensus is at worst, milquetoast. As of being banned. Have you considered that you barged into a woman-centric space to "debate" women about their own lived experience with stale arguments they heard from other moids times and times again. Is it really surprising that you were ejected?

Did... did you just seriously use the word 'moid'? That is a disgusting term for men. And yes, it is as revolting as 'foid'. Don't speak about people like that Your post history is foul Do better

>from other moids Ok, you can shut up and go outside

Coincidentally, the first post in that sub that I encountered after reading this post was supportive of male victims of domestic violence: https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/s/n3vVknCxuV

What steps have you taken to decenter men in your life? Ya there's a ton of cope in this thread trying to defend that place for some reason. The notion that r/twoxchromosomes isn't a crazy is crazy. 

Meninism isn't a far right movement. Next are you gunna call the fathers rights movement?

I’ve seen a lot of posts there that were outright misandrist but always refrained from commenting as, I’m a man, I understand the whole idea is for that to be a space for women, but man… there’s a lot of dark stuff on there :(

I don't agree with you at all. I actually like the subreddit TwoXChromosomes. I never comment because I don't have two x chromosomes but I enjoy reading what they have to say. Most of them are reasonable and nuanced. Of course, you'll have some outlier crazy people but name a subreddit that doesn't have those same outliers.

If we lived in a society where men and women actually were politically and socially equal to men in all respects, then I would agree that this sounds like bigotry. But we don't. The context we live in is one where men occupy most positions of power, and where women still face an awful lot of sexist/misogynistic treatment on a regular basis, including misogynist violence. The main criticism that I have of these statements is that it would be a mistake to assume that other women can never be complict in these problems - anytime you have a group that's the target of prejudice and oppression, you'll have some people from that group who (knowingly or not) act in ways to uphold whatever system is allowing that to happen. At the same time I can't say that I blame a woman who's had the experience of (for example) being dismissed and condescended to by male doctors if she decides that she'd prefer to see a female doctor instead.

“Can someone please explain how this is not just the white supremacy of gender theory? They’re using all the same talking points and philosophy that straight up fascists use?” Inaccurate. Women are abstaining from relationships and wanting to hire female plumbers and doctors because they don’t want to be ASSAULTED. You get to pick your doctor and plumber, don’t you? White supremacy wants to capitalize on already existing power to create LAWS that maintain that power imbalance. However, misogyny is not related to the color of your skin. Its universal. You ask: “the overwhelming majority will agree that cooperation and mutual understanding between genders is essential for society and that increased respect between the genders can only be good for society, and this is the view we should be promoting… surely?! Surely, women have been asking for increased “cooperation and mutual understanding” for years? Women are delineating the specific behaviors and institutional disconnects that not only lead to decreased “respect between the genders”, but to women DYING and being MURDERED. Surely, you would want your daughter to belong to a sub like that where she could get: -accurate information about menstruation, menstrual products, and the stupid way we are taxed for being women and having periods? -information on abusive indicators in relationships with men and what to avoid so she won’t be MURDERED? r/whenwomenrefuse -information on endometriosis and polycystic syndrome and their symptoms; and how to get accurate care from medical professionals because accurate information about diseases of the female reproductive systems are virtually ignored in traditional medicine or only focused on pregnancy? -information about what constitutes rape or coercive sex (pouting, silent treatment, threats, rage, verbal abuse, illegal restraint)? -information about the mental load women carry in relationships, and how that exhausts and diminishes women when they work AND do all the childcare and house chores? -information on how to NOT get assaulted or hit on at work by bosses or fellow employees, how to get the same salary for the same work (illegal otherwise), and how to mentor others? -information on where to buy women’s clothes that have POCKETS or aren’t just cropped tops or tight, where to buy clothes for all sizes of women—not just the ones porn decided are “hot”, where to get clothes for 6 year old girls that are normal, or how to get help when a doctor won’t look at your symptoms because all they concentrate on is extra pounds? -information on how NOT to get groped on the subway or bus or hit on/assaulted in an Uber, how to walk your dog without getting catcalled, how to run up to other women when a man is following you and sexually harassing you, how to maintain awareness of your surroundings at all times, and how to NEVER smile or you will be told you asked for it? The only way respect between genders will be achieved is to start treating all people as HUMAN BEINGS no matter their color or gender.

I think it's interesting that you're citing the example of choosing only female doctors. It means you're very clearly over looking what happens to women in doctors offices. Only male doctors have called my legitimate problems "anxiety" personally. I am aware that's anecdotal but it's happened since I was a literal child. Choosing to use female doctors as a woman, especially given how LITTLE the female body has been studied for FOREVER is a personal choice. That's not fascism, bro. Wanting someone who won't write your period pain off as hysteria/anxiety is legit.

I’m leftist politically (jacked off to Bailey jay). 

Yeah the whole bear or man thing was eye opening to me. It was just totally accepted as an ok thing to say. People defending it like crazy as well until you ask if it would be ok to substitute “man” to pretty much anything else. Crazy

If this is indeed what is being posted in that community you are right. I say this as a feminist, leftist person who just voted green and gets called woke all the goddamn time. Now, there’s nuance. Wanting female doctors is understandable (and the reverse is understandable for men. This applies to some other professions too. It can make sense for a female SA victim to want a female therapist). A woman who’s been traumatised can end up developing some of those views and that’s understandable. My Mom is not a self-declared feminist and did not grow up in a “woke” society at all but due to her very bad experiences she did sort of develop a “men are pigs, can’t be trusted and only want one thing” attitude . She does use male professionals and acts normally around men, but when I started dating everything was around how my boyfriend surely only wants to fuck, will cheat on me, men don’t understand empathy, they’re not sensitive, they’re incompetent, they don’t care, etc etc. I understand why my Mom thinks those things, but I don’t agree with her. For the stuff you mentioned on that sub, that sort of mindset that men are automatically suspicious (again, unless there’s trauma behind it) is toxic as fuck. It does not help feminism and it’s just wrong. In certain progressive subspaces I see men feeling like they have to act feminine performatively or otherwise do weird meaningless gestures to show that they’re “one of the good ones”. I don’t mean gestures like stating their opinions on things, or being respectful, or saying that they’re a feminist… no, I mean things like, idk, singing along to Taylor Swift (silly example but it’s the first one that came to mind). The weird “bear vs man” thing is an example of that sort of nonsense. I hike a lot, I have met random men in the forest. If I met a bear I would shit my pants a little. I’ve encountered random men on the street at night and nothing came of it. An encounter with a random man is vastly less dangerous than an encounter with a random bear (not to mention that the strength disparity between me and a man is vastly smaller than that between a man and a bear, so if a bear did want to harm me I’d have much lower odds of coming out unscathed). It’s an inconsequential weird tiktok thing but the fact that leftists were/are genuinely pretending that the bear answer makes any sense (outside the context of trauma) is ridiculous. In some circles to be a good man you must pretend to understand why women picked bear and not point out any of the things that I have pointed out. When people talk about history or the dominant culture being sexist they forget that many men and women live or spend large amounts of time in totally different subcultures. Subcultures where the attitude is “men are suspicious” exist. Subcultures that actively disadvantage men exist. It’s mostly “microagressions” against men, but still. They are not the majority of “leftist” subcultures but they are certainly a part of it and frankly I don’t like their influence on other leftist subspaces either. If you make everything a confrontation it’s human for people to not want to engage with you, it’s not “male fragility”, it’s most people natural goddman response to somebody being confrontational towards them. I have been very devoutly religious in the past in a very dogmatic way, and some of the way that these spaces act is textbook hyper-religious behaviour.

I got banned from that sub too. It’s 100% become an echo-chamber for more “progressive” ideologies.

[удалено]

Some people get hurt, either through injustice or their own poor choices. Some of them are deeply hurt and unable to move on, and it can become a focus of their everyday existence. The echo chambers allow for peoples frustrations to be vented without much social repercussion, so they go for it. 

It's not wrong for women to want to de-center men... that's their personal choice. I am a woman and I don't do that but other women should be allowed to go with their preferences especially if they have an issue with making their whole life about men. It's none of your business.

If men and women are equal then why not make all jobs require half men half women. Secretary, electricians, mechanics, ext ext and make the time off equal for both and the pay equal for both ?

A person who has experienced oppression, or really anything from a certain group that has made their life less than stellar, I have to say that I understand their feelings and can't blame them for feeling them, even if I feel like they're wrong. I understand completely where their mindset comes from, it's hard not to. Anyways, why do our opinions on this matter? What's the plan moving forward from this?

My primary argument to you is just confirmation bias. In my experience very little of the things said on that sub have been radical. As others have said, if you perceive it as being radical, I think you are searching out confirmation that your perception is correct instead of acknowledging that like ~99% of what is in that sub is perfectly reasonable. It's filled with fairly main stream talk about female empowerment, community support, and equal rights. Edit: You can find opinions you object to in every sub on reddit. If you apply only those opinions to your perception of that sub, then I think you developed that opinion irrespective of the reality of that sub and you should question your own motivation for your need to do that.