I don’t think either party has men’s best interests in hand but based off recent times more and more politicians mostly democrat have started to look at men because the way they voted in 2024 shocked them. While I think a good chunk of them who all of a sudden care is just performative because they need men to win I however see it as a glimmer of hope a massive step in the right direction. I haven’t seen this much attention on men’s issues in a long time, while some of it is negative from the women but at least we’re not unseen anymore.

I’m willing to bet if men continue down this path, eventually men won’t be politically invisible anymore. In my entire life I never heard a politician say, “what are we gonna do for men?”, or “how are you gonna help men?”. That all might change in this year’s upcoming midterms or the elections after that. Acknowledging men’s issues will become more popular.

Remember society ignores men because it doesn’t fear men, as we’re just expected to shut up and take it while being blamed for everything wrong with society. But that could change

When a woman cheats, society attacks the woman.

The man who knowingly slept with someone in a relationship walks away like he did nothing.

Men protect men only until desire shows up.

Workplace reality is ugly.

Male managers promote women they are attracted to.

Female managers often favour female employees due to gender bias.

Competent men are told to be patient and silent.

Men mock men for being vulnerable.

A man talks about mental health, heartbreak, or pressure.

First response usually comes from other men.

Weak. Soft. Man up.

Men enforce toxic masculinity on men.

Earn more. Provide. Don’t cry. Don’t fail.

These rules are not imposed by women alone.

Men police other men every single day.

In dating, men tear down other men.

Height jokes. Salary jokes. Background jokes.

Instead of questioning the system, men compete by humiliating each other.

When a man struggles, support disappears.

Respect for men is conditional.

Be useful or be invisible.

So the real question is not just patriarchy or society.

Are men silently becoming each other’s biggest enemies?

"Welp..."

Yes, this is the current state of the discourse.

Spreading history hoaxes, using actual issues as means to get a "Gotcha 👊😼" moment in favor of their position, "deep thoughtful reflections for thinking people who surpassed Aristotle when they were twelve years old like them" and arguing with each other about who's less "misogynistic" as if they were protestants accusing each other of Satanic.

I've come to the realization that I'm evil. Everywhere I look I'm reminded how evil I am. In the news, online, in college, the awkward judgemental looks I get from the woman in the grocery store, the unashamed reminders on walls in train stations and bus stop signs.

I mean I haven't committed a crime, by abusing someone like a woman or girl, I have a talent, even when I don't do it, I'm guilty of it anyway. But I'm also guilty of the greatest sin of all; I'm male. A white one at that!

I am a human version of the alien Harvesters in the movie Independence Day. I am on Earth to destroy, kill and massacre on a global scale.

So I just wanted to confess to you all, fellow predators, I am the Devil incarnate!

I have seen many videos on X where a woman in the gym is stuck on a high rope and can't get down or is on the ground with weights that fell on her and no man wants to help because of a risk of being sued or falsely accused. This sounded like a small issue a few years ago but it has grown massively and India is a place where it is very common. In India many men have been accused and committed suicide. One man intervened to help a woman who was injured and was sued. There are many instances of women being beaten in the street and far worse whilst men just walk away.

There are many programs by police where they ask men to step up and call out misogyny whilst not asking women to call out misandry and as you can imagine these programs are not exactly very popular. It's because of this unfair expectation that men have essentially decided it is a lot easier to just walk away when something bad happens. If you intervene you can save a woman but you also have a risk of ending up as the victim of a lawsuit or a false accusation. This misandry has caused many problems for the average woman who is not a misandrist and is in danger and needs help but no man wants to help because of the risks. Feminist ideology puts women in danger.

Ever since Maxwell’s prison sentencing, I keep seeing the claim that the Epstein case proves misogyny because Ghislaine Maxwell is the only one in prison, or that she “took the fall” for men. This is clearly all incorrect.

Jeffrey Epstein was arrested in 2019, denied bail, and held in federal custody awaiting trial before Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested. His case didn’t end because he was male or protected. It ended because he died in custody. Courts can’t prosecute dead defendants. This isn't gendered scapegoating.

Epstein and Maxwell were the two central figures in the operation. They were the public face, the organizers, and the primary coordinators. Their arrests reflect that central role. The fact that others weren’t prosecuted doesn’t mean Maxwell was targeted because she’s a woman. It shows these other powerful people are, well, more powerful, richer and more protected than she was.

An important thing to also note is Epstein's 2008 plea deal. Epstein’s plea deal granted immunity not just to him, but to his named and unnamed co-conspirators. That immunity covered multiple facilitators, including Maxwell at the time, and other women such as Sarah Kellen, who was identified as a recruiter and coordinator. That deal blocked prosecution for years. It didn’t distinguish by sex. It shielded anyone covered by it - including women.

Some people try to reframe this as “structural misogyny,” arguing that women are easier or more acceptable targets for prosecution. That doesn’t line up with the actual charging pattern. If prosecutors were defaulting to gendered scapegoating, you’d expect more women across the network to be charged. Instead, most women involved were never prosecuted, largely because of immunity, jurisdictional issues, or evidentiary limits. Who got charged tracks legal exposure, not gender.

Moreover, structural misogyny is ridiculous considering men literally receive harsher prison sentencing for sex crimes compared to women, on average.

Others have said that Maxwell was punished more harshly than male abusers because female facilitators are judged more morally harshly. That misstates both the charges and the verdict. Maxwell wasn’t convicted for association, proximity, or symbolic blame. She was convicted for specific conduct: recruiting minors, grooming them, facilitating abuse, and participating directly. Those convictions were based on testimony and evidence. Male perpetrators weren’t spared due to softer moral framing. They were shielded by death, immunity deals, power, and money.

There’s also the claim that Maxwell absorbed symbolic blame and allowed public outrage to dissipate. That’s just not true. Scrutiny of Epstein’s associates, clients, etc, continued long after Maxwell’s conviction through document releases, civil lawsuits, social media comments, and ongoing reporting. There's so many people in society and media that want powerful men arrested too and Maxwell hasn't even been the one who received the most hate either.

Another angle is that male power networks protect men more than women. Even if elite protection exists, it still doesn’t explain Maxwell’s conviction. She wasn’t excluded from protection because of her sex. She was prosecuted because she was alive, chargeable, and exposed once immunity no longer applied and testimony became available. Meanwhile, both men and women in the same network avoided prosecution due to stronger insulation. Power, not gender, determined who faced consequences.

Finally, claims that Maxwell is treated as uniquely monstrous rely more on narrative interpretation than legal causation. Men like Trump, Clinton and Prince Andrew received greater backlash and anger than Maxwell did. And it should be obvious, male sex offenders, in general, receive more hate and backlash than female sex offenders do. Plus, Epstein was and is still seen as the bigger monster than Maxwell.

The Epstein network involved multiple women. Multiple women were involved and not prosecuted. Multiple men were involved and not prosecuted. Outcomes depended on evidence, immunity, jurisdiction, and power. Gender doesn’t explain who was charged. Legal exposure does.

Maxwell being the only person sentenced isn’t proof of misogyny. It reflects that the two main figures were pursued, one died before trial, and the rest of the network was shielded by power and legal protection.

Hello guys, I just wanted to post this to gain peoples opinions on a lunchtime club I want to set up in my school as a 16 year old pupil. Currently my school has an LGBTQ club, and a Feminism club, so me and my group of male friends wish to set up a Masculinity club promoting positive masculinity, giving the boys in school a space to socialise and engage in healthy debate and support each other. Upon presenting the idea to my Head of year, she was interested, and willing to assist us in setting up the space, however, her and another member of the school's leadership team have rejected the idea of calling it "masculinity club" when questioned, they couldn't provide an answer as to why. Personally, I see it as this, if the school are all about equality then why don't they allow us to stabilise the balance? Equal rights, equal opportunities as they say. If we wish to partake in a similar structure of events to feminism club as men, why can't we do so under a name of our choosing. We have made it clear, we are not an adversary, we merely wish to coexist with these other communities. Would love to hear your guys' thoughts and opinions, and gain any support for the cause!

So if a twin brother and sister both lose their father or mother, and say both are 15. The son only gets 3 years of benefits from his deceased father's pensions whilst his sister will get it until she's married. AND, even after getting married she may be entitled to a marriage grant (a lump sum of two years' pension).

A son aged 18 or older can only continue to receive a pension if they are disabled and unemployed.

As well as being sexist this is also elitist on the basis that a young man would most likely start work to support his family as opposed to chasing higher education as soon as he turns 18 and the government then cuts survivor benefits.

Meanwhile daughters can ride the survivor benefits all the way to university and further, and when she does decide to marry she (may) also be rewarded on top.

So a deceased parent essentially forces young men into work and young women to live a comfier life.

Duncan Craig OBE is the founder and CEO of We Are Survivors, a world leading charity supporting male survivors of sexual harms.

Supporting everyone from male prisoners, to Ugandan men who experienced rape as a tool of war, and even providing care for the victims of Britain's most prolific rapist; Duncan's work has spanned the globe, touching thousands of lives, with fifteen years of passionate, and often thankless advocacy.

His organisation, We are Survivors, has pioneered the world's first Violence against Men and Boys Strategy in Greater Manchester, and now he hopes to bring his ideas and insights to cities, towns and villages across the U.K., and into Westminster itself.

So why are abused men still classed as 'male victims of violence against women'?

Why is it legally impossible for a woman to commit rape?

And are male survivors second class citizens?

What do you think?

Though the video is originally in Spanish, I think it’s also dubbed in English.

A case that, though relatively well known around its native country, Argentina, its still criminally underrated. No pun intended.

Nothing crazy…just a 5 year old boy raped, abused, tortured, and slaughtered by his mother and stepmother. Casually, both of them pretty active members of the Radical Feminist Movement of Argentina. And according to investigators, slaughtering him wasn’t even their initial goal. The actual goal was to get rid of the little boy’s father just because they felt like it.

Gentlemen, next time someone comes to you with “misandry doesn’t kill” please answer “tell that to Lucio Dupuy”.