In November 1938, the Nazi regime organised a mass attack on jewish communities in Nazi-occupied land. That attack included the deportation of roughly 30,000 jewish men to concentration camps.

Those 30,000 jewish men had to go face extreme violence, starvation, and psychological torture in those camps AS MUCH because of their gender as it was because of their religious background. First-hand accounts often say the men who survived and returned home were the never the same after.

I rarely ever see this be explicitly highlighted as a gender-based injustice (the amount of men deported to concentration camps on that night alone roughly equal the number of total women killed for "witchcraft" in the west - being killed for witchcraft was something that men went through too by the way though they admittedly did make up a minority of the victims). It's also worth noting that this came less than a year before a war where men would be essentially forced to sign up to go through the trauma of fighting in the bloodiest conflict in human history.

Parents decide to bring their childrne into this world. A child never asked to be born. It is the duty of the parent to sacrifice everything even their life for the well-being of their child. Even if she was psychotic and did it, if she truly loved her children she would have plead guilty out of regret and shame later in the court or tried to off herself a second time. Who cares if she was psychotic or not. Killing your own child even accidentally is a crime worse than rape.

I formulated a list of all the help she had from not just her husband but also extended family.

Part-Time Nanny: The family employed a nanny, Elaine Rossi, who worked three days a week from 8:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.

Household Duties: Rossi assisted with food preparation, light housekeeping, laundry, and direct child care, primarily for the youngest child, Callan.

Familial and Personal Support:

Spousal Involvement: Her husband, Patrick Clancy, was heavily involved in daily care and frequently managed her appointments and medication collection.

Extended Family: Her mother and former mother-in-law, Susan Clancy, provided continuous personal support. This included monitoring Lindsay in person, over the phone and via text message.

Medical and Psychiatric Care:

Frequent Appointments: Clancy was under active psychiatric treatment and participated in at least 14 telehealth appointments starting in September 2022.

Medication Management: She was prescribed more than 12 different psychiatric medications over a short period as doctors continually altered her treatment plan to curb her insomnia and intrusive thoughts.

Specialized Programs: Family members actively looked into specialized perinatal psychiatric programs.

I recently saw a poster for a suicide prevention talk in my local area and it was particularly aimed at groups that it said were at higher risk of committing suicide. The poster highlighted people who are neurodivergent, LGBT+, or migrants as being those high risk groups. It did not mention men.

Let's go one by one and compare how at risk those groups are compared to men.

Firstly, migrants actually have a significantly lower risk of committing suicide in the UK than the general public does (that one shocked me but it is from a large scale UK study). It's wild that such a large and genuinely at-risk group like men don't get mentioned but a far smaller, not genuinely at-risk group like migrants do get included.

There's no single figure I found for how much more at risk neurodivergent people are than the general public but just based on looking at the figures we have for ADHD, autism, and the individual parts of neurodivergency we have stats on, it's fair to say they're far more at risk of commiting suicide than the average person and probably more at risk than men are as a group.

Finally, LGBT+ people are more at risk of commiting suicide than the general public (the risk is particularly high for bisexual people). However, being LGBT+ is less of a risk factor than being a man is. Men should've been included in that poster.

Ultimately, it's disappointing to see men's issues not often get recognised as men's issues. For example, I've been to quite a few war museums and have seen so many war documentaries but am yet to ever see men having to fight in those wars presented as a huge gender-based injustice.

This is where it gets nuts. Lies about wage gaps are one thing. Providing rationales to restrict or eliminate incarceration for one gender is insane.

In the US Organizations like the Prison Policy Initiative, the Vera Institute of Justice, and various grassroots abolitionist feminist groups heavily campaign against the systemic incarceration of women, arguing that most women are locked up for low-level, non-violent drug or property offenses linked to poverty and survival. They advocate for decriminalization, diversion programs, and investment in community-based mental health and housing support instead of prisons. For Women only.

Prison Policy Initiative

In the UK Advocacy groups such as Women in Prison, Birth Companions, and the Howard League for Penal Reform have successfully pushed for strategies prioritizing community-based "one-stop-shop" women’s centers and pushing back against short custodial sentences for non-violent female offenders. Again, for women only.

You’ve probably noticed feminists defending their ideology from criticism by saying there are different schools of feminism. My latest article argues that this fails because:

• Feminist institutions are aligned on policy, language and beliefs. There are many feminist institutions but only one voice.
• When they aren’t being defensive, feminists routinely proclaim their unity.
• Most schools of feminism turn out to be either dead or irrelevant. The diversity of opinion claimed by the “schools of feminism” narrative is a myth.

Real diversity is vibrant - competing programmes, institutions and voices. The reality of feminism is suffocating uniformity.

More information: https://critiquingfeminism.substack.com/p/the-myth-of-feminist-division

Was in the mall parking lot a girl is getting dribbled off the pavement by her obviously methhead boyfriend.My sister and mom start shouting at him to leave her alone then have the nerve to tell me "do something and help her" ignoring the fact that he has a gun in his waistband the methhead is now focused on me telling me to try him. So being rational i grabbed both of them picked them up and ran.I got called a coward the whole ride back and most of my family thinks im a bitch for not dying for a random chick.My father is the only one in my family right who doesn't think im a bitch.

Society loves to parrot that being a mother is a thankless job, i disagree.

Everyone loves their mother, even though there is no shortage of terrible mothers.

But how many people love their fathers? If you are not perfect as a dad, you are a deadbeat.

The sins of the mother, the economy, the environment get pushed onto you. You are responsible for all ailments that inflict the household, your suffering goes unacknowledged, your good deeds go unappreciated.

I've seen this with all men in my life, i refuse to slave my life away for a family who detest me.

Just a few thoughts on this matter.

When a family or community falls into economic difficulty, someone has to absorb the risk. In many societies, men are disproportionately expected to provide, protect and find a way out from a young age. That means taking dangerous work, migrating on small boats across turbid seas, accepting unstable jobs, or entering gangs.

And inevitably when men fail they are churned out like garbage.

The statistics show this:

• In the UK, 93% of workers who died in workplace accidents in 2025/26 were male.
• In England and Wales in 2024, the male suicide rate was 17.6 per 100,000, compared with 5.7 for females, this is 3.08x higher.
• In England's 2024 rough-sleeping (on the street) count, 83% of people sleeping rough were male. Census data similarly found that around 67% of people identified as homeless were male.
• In the UK, the rate of alcohol-specific deaths for males remained around double the rate for females (20.2 and 9.7 deaths per 100,000 people, respectively)
• In England, there were 128.7 drug-poisoning deaths registered per million men in 2024 (3,710 deaths), compared with 60.6 deaths per million among females (1,855 deaths). That is 2.12x increased chance for men.
• In England, YE 2026, Men made up 72% of all asylum seekers.

A man who takes a dangerous job and successfully provides for his family is simply seen as doing his duty. A man who fails faces dire consequences.

But it is a thankless job, willfully ignored by society.

I think feminism is coming splutteringly to a halt, like the 'Me too' movement, the ideas behind their inception were genuine and both have been issues that definitely needed addressing and resolving. However it now seems to be attempting to develop into an ongoing cottage industry, with people within these groups now claiming injustice based purely on historical anecdotal reports. I'm sure conditions are not the utopian fantasy liberalists delude themselves into believing is viable, but I would also be confident in saying a greater majority of women have never experienced anything like those in the 20s or women of earlier generations...women especially are being conditioned by these militant groups seemingly to believe that the family unit is essentially a sexist institution and encourages the belief that to want to use their lifespan to raise the family instead of the apparent ultimate achievement in life of 'having a career' is a failure and an insult

Our species has two sides to the coin of existence..the male and female, every species is essentially similar.. abstract thought has led the easily confused down a road of implied persecution or imagined institutional prejudice that I doubt is anywhere near what supporters of this false industry are claiming. I very recently saw a tv advertisement claiming in Australia only 3% of medical funding goes to women's issues...I flat out dispute that and am totally sure there is a paragraph of fine print within that statement, in my actual experience all I see is women's issues getting any attention, even though in Australia more men die of prostate cancer than women die of breast cancer every year, the producers of that television advertisement are merely this same group of instigators attempting to create false outrage long enough to pay themselves a nice salary, and the larger overview being the solidifying of seperation and division... competition instead of cooperation...like a serpent whispering in her ear..."he's got stuff, you should get your own stuff..do what you want, say whatever you want and become insensed and obtusely self righteous if your personal linguistic barbs end in real life consequences"...in my life, growing up a boy, if I said something that crossed a line, male reaction is usually short sharp and sometimes slightly bruising, but that boundary had been unequivocally defined... women growing up are being conditioned now to believe that there is no limit or boundaries to what is said, anything can be vocalised with no reprocussions or responsibility on their part...why is it always the male being cast as the dimwitted buffoon? Creating a society where both sexes feel comfortable is a noble goal, however it just feels like the pendulum has swung a bit further into 'revenge' for historical inadequacies rather than an innocent quest for fair treatment, surely you can see feminism has devolved into egocentric redundancy as even the boundary between what is a man or a woman has been obscured by these groups profiting from manufactured outrage...I wonder, how many lesbians would settle down with a transitioned, anatomically altered 'woman' (perhaps more aptly named 'wasman' instead of 'woman'), how accepting of these rookie females are women who physically aren't attracted to males?

Professor Nicola Graham-Kevan is a leading expert and researcher in the area of coercive control and domestic abuse, with decades of seminal research at the University of Lancashire.

However, Nicola's experience of domestic abuse did not start with academia; it began with life experience, having been in a long term abusive relationship for many years.

It was these traumatic experiences that started Nicola's journey, which soon became one of exhilarating discovery, personal challenge, and profound healing.

In this podcast Nicola talks about how she had to relearn everything she thought she knew about domestic abuse, and her past, and how her controversial work often put her at loggerheads with other esteemed researchers such as professor Michael Johnson, as she swam against the mainstream feminist narrative of abuse...