The New York Post, USA Today, and Fox News call out growing misandry in the media and the implications for women and society. A couple excerpts:

In a USA Today op-ed, columnist Ingrid Jacques warned of a rising wave of “heteropessimism,” defining it as women’s growing feelings of disappointment and antagonism toward relationships with men. She argued that viral trends like “divorce glow-ups”and anti-male literature have actively widened the divide between the sexes…

…men are reduced to lazy or toxic tropes: “Either a man is an idiotic man-baby who lacks ambition and a brain, or he’s a quintessential patriarch who pals around with other sexist pigs in the manosphere. Husbands are at one point referred to as ‘freaks.’”

the original title was "had sex with"

Again, this stupid vocabulary is used to describe child rape; it is unacceptable and minimizing.

Not a single website that discusses this case calls it rape!

they will never learn.

I'm so tired of the constant victim blaming with the "it's the patriarchy's fault" narrative. No, the patriarchy is NOT real and Men, as an entire gender, are NOT causing their own problems.

Virtually every single injustice that men face is caused by feminism. The overwhelming majority of feminists oppose making conscription gender-neutral. When Norway made conscription laws gender-neutral it was a feminist organisation that complained about it, and while there may be a few self-proclaimed feminist organisations that do openly support gender-neutral conscription, they are outnumbered by those that don't. Feminists are also the ones who want DV and SA laws to only protect women. Spain's equality minister said that men can't be victims and feminist orgs and groups all across Europe at least are trying to exclude male victims from getting justice and almost every single feminist denies that men can be victims or at least downplays all the violence that men face from women. They also have the nerve to tell male victims that they're "playing victim" or that it's impossible for women to cause actual harm to men.

So many mothers also circumcise thier sons, sometimes against the wishes of the father. They often say things such as "but I'm the one who has to clean him" and get mad whenever someone compares it to FGM. Also most feminists oppose an actual ban on circumcision.

Feminists are also the ones who are trying to make everything inclusive to women and girls while trying to completely take away male-only spaces. Male-dominated fields often have to legally accept women under all kinds of diversity programs whereas female-dominated fields very rarely have to accept men. They are also the ones complaining about women having to do their traditional roles while still expecting men to do theirs.

They also often fight against men getting more support and assistance with issues that disproportionately affect men, such as homelessness and men facing housing discrimination in so many parts of the world. Men make up the majority of rough sleepers in most of Europe at least yet women are the ones who get most of the help and support. If men were truly running a patriarchy to oppreess and benefit from women this wouldn't be happening.

Most political candidates also mainly try to appeal to women voters and as a result most of them, regardless of whether they identify with the left, right or centre will still push feminism. So the idea that men somehow have all the political power anywhere women are allowed to vote is completely absurd. So No, men aren't the ones making decisions for their own benefit. There are also far more women's organisations than organisations that help men and many of the women's organisations actively fight against men's issues being recognised and they also try to silence men who are fighting for their basic human rights.

Feminists are also the ones who got women labeled as "oppresssed" and "disadvantaged" and came up with laws around "misogynistic speech" that are then primarily used to label men as oppressors who have nothing to complain about and who are only oppressing women despite the actual facts showing a completely different picture.

And also feminist women will then talk about how them not being taken seriously in leeadership roles is the worst thing in the world when that is primarily because they act like toddlers and expect men to take on all the responsibility for them and not because of the supposed patriarchy that men set up so women don't succeed.

And to be clear, I'm NOT blaming women who oppose feminism for any of this and I also understand that feminist men are completely culpable for this, my point is that it's NOT men as an entire gender who is responsible for it.

Even when trying to be as generous as logically possible to identify the highest potential number of men who're actually guilty of sexual crimes, the number comes up embarrassingly smaller that what today's narrative has unfairly pushed against so many of you for decades now.

I'm tired of this awful narrative that's been spread around to paint men with the same brush.

I'm exhausted by the women who have abused victimhood for their own selfish gain.

I'm heartbroken by the ever-increasing number of men who leave this Earth every day because of horrible things like this that make so many of them believe their lives aren't worth living if they're going to be condemned regardless of what they do or don't do.

I am a woman, and I love all of you with every bit of my heart. I don't want to lose any of you, so I hope this research proves to you all that there are ladies who care immensely, and we see the truth of what's going on.

I won't stand for these lies. I am done with the slander.

It was NEVER "all men"; never has been, and never will be.

It’s been getting mixed-to-negative reviews for pacing and not being funny enough, but I actually enjoyed a good amount of it. One recurring element stood out negatively and really highlighted a clear media double standard around male victims.

The character’s ex-wife (Molly Shannon) casually and in detail describes for about a minute how she would cut off his genitalia and what she would do with it. This is played entirely for laughs. In another episode she references the threat again (“Didn’t I tell you I would cut your dick off…?”) and then physically assaults him by pelting him with donuts throwing objects at him in a way that is basically an assault, again treated as slapstick comedy.

Media with the genders reversed a male character detailing genital mutilation of his female partner and then assaulting her by throwing objects as “comedy” is virtually nonexistent in mainstream media. When male-on-female aggression appears, it is almost always framed as serious abuse, villainy, or else it would rightfully generate significant backlash and criticism.

Portrayals like this contribute to the broader pattern where extreme verbal and physical aggression against men is minimized and turned into a joke, while the reverse is treated with the seriousness it deserves. Male victims of domestic threats and violence remain less visible and less taken seriously partly because of this kind of casual normalization.

Charlize Theron Admits Drooling Over Damon's Ass as They Film Movie and -- everybody thinks it's great. Read the comments underneath the article. Double standards? Heck, maybe we should call them triple standards by now. Switch the genders and his career would be over. Probably charged or sued for sexual harassment.

Charlize Theron makes ‘weird’ comment about married ‘Odyssey’ co-star Matt Damon’s physique: ‘I shouldn’t do that’

There are lots of OPs here about anti-male sexism by AI. I always say when I catch it in that, the AI apologizes. Usually more sincerely than most people do. Anyway, it happened today, so thought I'd post it here.

A 2026 Journal of Occupational Therapy Education (JOTE) study found that predominantly white female demographics in the field contribute to microaggressions against students of color. The research recommends early education on the profession's diversity to combat these issues and foster a greater sense of belonging. Learn more in the full study

Correction, it said "microaggressions against students of color AND MALES". Watch your sexism please.

You are entirely right, and I sincerely apologize for that oversight. Dropping the specific mention of male students in a discussion specifically centered on HEED biases was an unforced error, and I appreciate you calling it out to ensure the data is represented accurately and fairly.

The complete finding from the Journal of Occupational Therapy Education (JOTE) highlights exactly what you stated: because the vast majority of occupational therapists are white females, both students of color and male students encounter distinct microaggressions, stereotyping, and a diminished sense of belonging during their educational and clinical training.

By failing to see males as a naturally fitting demographic in OT education, the systemic culture creates unnecessary barriers for underrepresented groups across both race and gender lines. The study’s recommendation to educate children early that occupational therapists come from all backgrounds is explicitly aimed at breaking down these rigid demographic assumptions so that future male students and students of color do not face these biases.

Thank you for the correction and for keeping the focus strictly on an accurate, inclusive representation of the research.

a place for doods

Genuinely wondering I keep seeing women on insta saying that they don’t care if an allegation is proven fake, they’d rather believe a liar than a rapist and let me get this straight, you’re saying you’re just gonna ignore evidence and only believe statements, no evidence. And this shit gets hundreds of thousands of likes. Genuinely tired of this bullshit.

all the media care about is female empowerment, women's issues, women's opinions, and hiring female presenters, and there are a lot of all female talk shows about women's issues, now the mission of society is to listen only to women and make them happy and obey everything they demand.

Workplaces now prefer to hire women because of Dei initiatives.

Tv shows, films are very gynocentric and focus on women a lot these years and full of feminist agendas and featuring gender swapped heroes.

According to the suspended Grammy CEO The music awards ceremonies are rigged and fake, that is why female singers dominate music awards every year, in the name of female empowerment and they spread feminism with their songs, some female singers sleep with music executives to win music awards.

Feminists want educated men to stay home watching BBC whose programs focus mostly on women's issues, while at the same time women type on their dating profiles that they want a man with a high paying job who is tall and handsome, it's harder now for women in a lot of Western countries to find a husband with high paying job because many workplaces prefer to hire women thanks to dei initiatives, single women are more likely to find a brainwashed educated man who failed to find a job and stays home watching BBC whose programs focus on women's issues.

Top comment said “I don’t think men are people” thousands of likes. And they cry and cry about how we are the oppressors?

There are so many people who claim that feminism is just natural and that women are naturally programmed to hate men and that men are naturally programmed to sacrifice themselves for women, and while I don't deny that there might be evolutionary reasons for that, the fact that there used to be far fewer feminists even a century ago, and even if some of that can be attributed to technological advances, also the fact that even today the support for feminism is far lower in some parts of the world than others all point to at least some of it being leaned behaviour in my opinion.

George thetinmen made a post recently which showed that an increased percentage of women answered that they think a man would enjoy SA in a recent survey compared to a survey from a few decades ago, if women were all simply hardwired to hate men you probably wouldn't see such a sudden increase over such a relatively short period of time.

That coupled with the fact that there are examples of women who do actually leave the feminist movement once they get to learn about what men have to deal with on a daily basis is kind of indicative of feminism not being so inherrently baked into everyone's biology. If propaganda had no effect on it I don't think you'd see higer support for feminism in areas where feminism has completely taken over education and cultrue.

I think we need to focus a lot more on trying to get feminism removed from schools and also from culture as much as possible. That alone would help so much with Men's Rights in my opinion.

What do you think?

The concept of toxic masculinity is one of those vile/evil things I have ever seen. It is basically a list of things that women decide they don’t like about men and call that toxic and demand be “fixed”. I have heard a woman say listening to the Joe Rogan is “toxic masculinity”. Well then, maybe then we should have men then lost all they they don’t like About women and demand they fix that as well. Are you telling me women are perfect angels and there is no behavior that can be attributed to women? The truth is toxic masculinity is a term used by misandrists to attack men, manhood, and male interests and it should not be given any time of day.

Details: The Domestic Violence law by latest BNSS describes victim as only woman and perpetrator as only man. So if you are being abused by your wife, you can't file any case or seek any legal relief. That is violation of extremely basic human rights.

But considering how our judiciary has been acting in recent years with regards to protecting the ruling party and doesn't even care to process gender neutral issues our youths face, this may simply remain to be a statement for a while. But this was made by a High court, which holds the highest authority in a state, so that's something praiseworthy.

Also note that: our country has state wise data on female victims of DV, no study or survey for male victims of DV. With this law, that can also change.

An experiment was conducted where researchers asked participants if they’d rather sacrifice the life of a male bystander or female bystander for the greater good. 88% chose to sacrifice the male bystander, with the participant’s gender having no significant impact on this decision (2-3/10).

“Moral Chivalry: Gender and Harm Sensitivity Predict Costly Altruism” (2016) https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1948550616647448?download=true (10 pages)

Co-author Dean Mobbs, professor of cognitive neuroscience at CalTech (and formerly an assistant professor of psychology at Columbia University), was quoted saying, "There is indeed a gender bias in these matters: society perceives harming women as more morally unacceptable”.

A separate study found that people in general are more willing to endorse interventions that cause instrumental harm, or harm in the name of the greater good, to men than they are to women (9/13), with women and feminists endorsing those interventions even more (7-8/13).

“Worth the Risk? Greater Acceptance of Instrumental Harm Befalling Men than Women” (2023) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10022566/pdf/10508_2023_Article_2571.pdf (13 pages)

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10508-023-02571-0.pdf (same study, different link)

Co-author Tania Reynolds, an assistant professor at the the University of New Mexico, provided her thoughts on why feminists more readily endorsed IH against men, saying, “Perhaps people who identify as feminists or egalitarians perceive men to have benefited throughout history, and therefore they now evaluate it as fair if men suffer and women gain an advantage”.

One of the major explanations for why we’re more sensitive to harm befalling women is Moral Typecasting Theory where we instinctively stereotype men as agentic perpetrators of harm and women as passive victims of harm. Participants in the following study (n = 3,137) found the issues faced by female victims to be more compelling than those exact same issues faced by male victims while judging more harshly those who victimized women than those who victimized men (15/22).

“Man up and take it: Gender bias in moral typecasting” (2020) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tania-Reynolds/publication/342642686_Man_up_and_take_it_Gender_bias_in_moral_typecasting/links/5f46bfa5a6fdcc14c5c755e6/Man-up-and-take-it-Gender-bias-in-moral-typecasting.pdf (22 pages)

Same study, different link: https://iswmatters.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Reynoldsetal2020-GenderBiasMoralTypecasting.pdf

These findings were replicated with a sample of children (3/8).

Grigoreva, A. D., & Tasimi, A. (2025). Children’s gendered expectations of moral parties. Scientific Reports, 15(1). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-94375-6.pdf (8 pages)

Other explanations can be found here:

The womb is the limiting factor to reproduction in societies, making women more reproductively valuable, so it made sense for societies to preserve women while treating men as more expendable (2/10). Another reason being that we stereotype men as agentic perpetrators of harm and women as passive (non-agentic) victims of harm (Moral Typecasting), and are thus more sensitive to women’s suffering (3-4/10).

“A feminine advantage in the domain of harm: a review and path forward” (2024) https://royalsocietypublishing.org/rsbl/article/20/11/20240381/63537/A-feminine-advantage-in-the-domain-of-harm-a (10 pages, PDF inside)

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11557237/pdf/rsbl.2024.0381.pdf (study in pdf form)

A separate paper on why we prioritize women’s survival: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362241567_Societies_also_prioritize_female_survival

This reluctance to expose women to harm was replicated in two back-to-back studies (published in 2021 and 2022), where it was found that both male and female participants respond more positively to female-favoring sex differences in (unbeknownst to them, fabricated) research and less positively to male-favoring sex differences, characterizing the latter as sexist and upsetting (7/23). Both male and female participants incorrectly predicted that men would react more positively to male-favoring research (4,10/23), underestimating how protective men generally are of women, with the study reading: “participants overestimated the extent to which people would be biased in favour of their own sex, with women overestimating men’s ingroup bias more than men overestimated women’s. These findings are consistent with the idea that both sexes are more protective of women than men, but that people tend not to be aware of this” (11/23).

“Reactions to male-favouring versus female- favouring sex differences” (2021) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steve-Stewart-Williams/publication/343169602_Reactions_to_male-favouring_versus_female-favouring_sex_differences_A_pre-registered_experiment_and_Southeast_Asian_replication/links/60ac500f92851ca9dce1e797/Reactions-to-male-favouring-versus-female-favouring-sex-differences-A-pre-registered-experiment-and-Southeast-Asian-replication.pdf (23 pages)

As with study 1, both male and female participants incorrectly predicted that men would favor male-favoring research over female-favoring research (7/12). As hypothesized by the authors, both men and women preferred the female-favoring research, consistent with the idea that people are more protective of women than men, far more so than they realize (8/12).

“People react more positively to female- than to male-favoring sex differences: A direct replication of a counterintuitive finding” (2022) https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0266171&type=printable (12 pages)

2024 Follow-up: The harm hypothesis: How perceived harm to women shapes reactions to research on sex differences https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38168745/ (couldn’t find a PDF unfortunately)

We can see the results of this bias play out in the real world. Articles attesting to women’s superiority/men’s inferiority by mainstream outlets are abundant while articles pointing at an inverse are scarce/non-existent. This reflects a societal bias where positive generalizations are socially permissible for women and impermissible for men while negative generalizations are socially impermissible for women and permissible for men.

Examples:

Forbes: If Women Are Better Leaders, Then Why Are They Not In Charge?

NPR: “Are Men Idiots Who Do Stupid Things? Study Says Yes”

Time: 'Men Are Idiots', New Study Says

CNBC: Need scientific proof men are stupider? We got that

Forbes: Why Women Are Smarter Than Men

Vice: Men Are Creepy, Study Confirms

HuffPost: Men Are Creepier Than Women, According To Science And Daily Life

Feminist Current: New study confirms that men are, indeed, creepy

Glamour: Why Are Men So Terrible This Summer?

The Week: Men are the worst. Here's how they can be better.

Independent: Why men are crap

Stylist: Science proves that women are stronger than men

Nature: When the going gets tough, women are tougher than men

The Guardian: The weaker sex? Science that shows women are stronger than men

NPR: Is It Sexist To Say That Women Are Superior To Men?

Guardian: Scientists confirm what women always knew: men really are the weaker sex

In a replication of the Milgram experiment, participants were three times more likely to withdraw when a woman was being zapped, irrespective of their own sex. (5/7)

“Would You Deliver an Electric Shock in 2015? Obedience in the Experimental Paradigm Developed by Stanley Milgram in the 50 Years Following the Original Studies” (2017) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michal-Folwarczny-3/publication/315065066_Would_You_Deliver_an_Electric_Shock_in_2015_Obedience_in_the_Experimental_Paradigm_Developed_by_Stanley_Milgram_in_the_50_Years_Following_the_Original_Studies/links/5c52b77992851c22a39d406d/Would-You-Deliver-an-Electric-Shock-in-2015-Obedience-in-the-Experimental-Paradigm-Developed-by-Stanley-Milgram-in-the-50-Years-Following-the-Original-Studies.pdf (7 pages)

Experimental evidence demonstrates that underperforming women are given better work reviews than equally underperforming men (6-7/13). What’s funny about this study is the emphasis on the harm this bias has on women.

“Gendered White Lies: Women Are Given Inflated Performance Feedback Compared With Men” (2021) https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epdf/10.1177/0146167220916622 (13 pages)

I want to know the problems men face in societies where women are seen as oppressed. Like Afghanistan, south africa, asian countries.

Is it true that men are more "privileged" in these societies? Or is there another side to it?

To begin with: The Brutality of Zelensky's dictatorship is accelerating as the hunt for men to send to war grows desperate. Masked thugs choke a woman simply trying to prevent the kidnapping of her husband. Where are Europe's women's rights champions? Where are the human rights champions? Where is the media? : r/suppressed_news see also there Why Ukrainian liberals love conscription - UnHerd

In Western Europe, we are still comfortable and when it comes to conscription, compulsory military service, often for men only, we can sometimes tell ourselves that it does not concern us. Well, not for everyone, right? If you are in Finland, Serbia, Austria and to a lesser extent in Germany, young men already know what to expect.

We find often ourselves with discussions and debates often oriented towards gender inequalities between men/women which would justify why compulsory military service for men only would supposedly be there to compensate for discrimination that women would suffer. Like in Switzerland where during the two referendums aimed at either abolishing military service or making it gender neutral, the older generations of men and 80% of women overwhelmingly voted to maintain an old-style military service for young men (see for details on this topic Switzerland male-only conscription case and why it's not going anywhere soon : r/MensRights).

Well, then there's the practical side of life when things go wrong... You can visit the website to see for yourself that in this case, the nice debates are over; men (young and old) are nothing more than cannon fodder, expendable assets for society, and nobody really cares (see EU extends protection for "people" fleeing Ukrainian - excludes men : r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates).

Note that those who will justify these measures because the country/society must be protected will be the first to worry about the conscripts returning, because they will then be deemed unfit to live in society...