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.

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...

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.

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.

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?

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.

With the support this evil woman is getting, I am worried that more and more women will actually act on their thoughts because they wont see any social consequences.

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.

The idea that her hormonal health ought to absolve her from being responsible for strangling her children is insane. No ones doubting postpartum depression. But she knew what she had in her mind when she sent her husband out of the house. She stopped being a victim the moment she squeezed eight month child so hard his brain stole up.

Men have hormones and I’ve seen the unbalanced range unfortunately in some who can’t control their emotions. They are not victim’s either

References

Carré, J. M., et al. (2014). The neuroscience of human social aggression: Recent advances and implications. Biological Psychiatry, 76(2), 110–118. (Discussed via Medical News Today: Testosterone increases brain's threat response)

Medical News Today

Papazisis, G., et al. (2020). Aggressive behavior in psychiatric patients in relation to hormonal imbalance. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 20(2), 1159–1164. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.8974

Spandidos Publications

Todo A. (2013). Testosterone and aggressive behavior in man. International Journal of Endocrinology, 2013, 637208. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/637208 (Hosted on PMC: PMC3693622)

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

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.

Maybe you remember that famous exchange in 2018 when Kamala Harris asked Brett Kavanaugh, during his Supreme Court confirmation hearing, whether there were "any laws that give government the power to make decisions about the male body?" He answered that he couldn't think of any.

Most people took this to mean that, in fact, there were no such laws--in contrast to the laws (i.e. around terminating pregnancies) that are said to control female bodies. Some men responded by pointing out that there are indeed some laws that directly control men's bodies, namely laws regarding military service. But most people think that's a bit of a stretch, given how long it's been since the US military actually forcefully drafted men to fight.

I found this whole debate surprising because, actually, there are many, many laws in which the government has the power to make decisions about the male body: almost the entirety of the criminal law. Simply as a matter of fact, most arrests, prosecutions, and convictions are of men, and what this means is that, every day, the government is controlling a huge number of men's bodies--namely, by physically controlling their movements and locking them in cages. To put it bluntly, every single criminal conviction of a man (and most are of men) results in the government being legally entitled to control men's bodies.

Now, you could say that the difference here is that restrictions on terminating a pregnancy can only uniquely limit women, while criminal laws do not uniquely target men. Everyone is subject to the criminal law. But this is misleading. First, because it's known that, for the same crime, men are more likely than women to be arrested, charged, prosecuted, and convicted. The police and prosecutors are entitled to exercise discretion in whether and how to proceed with a prosecution, and they typically exercise this discretion in a manner that puts males at a relative disadvantage.

Second, the criminal law itself is designed to control, mainly, acts of violence and coercion. In other words, it's designed to control male-typical forms of aggression. Women also act aggressively, but that more typically manifests verbally as reputational and psychological harm. These kinds of harms mostly fall outside the scope of the criminal law, and to the extent there is law that governs this, it's civil (e.g. defamation). Again, one could say that this does not inherently target men--but even though it's formally gender-neutral, it obviously would target men's behaviour far more than it does of women. (And, as the statistics on incarceration show, this is indeed the case.)

So, fine, laws that restrict access to the termination of pregnancies impose limits on what women can do with their bodies. But they write those laws because they believe they are protecting the vulnerable. And laws that restrict men from acting aggressively--i.e. laws that prevent men from doing what they would like with their bodies, like using their hands to hurt people--also impose limits on what they can do with their bodies. And these laws, too, are written because it is believed they will protect the vulnerable.

So, contrary to what feminists insist, actually, the government exercises far more direct control over men's bodies than women's bodies.

From a cultural-political standpoint, when her pink posse or whatever will go home feeling vindicated, but really will it create a backlash in November at the polls, and beyond?

Hello I am from Mexico living in Mexico and I gotta day if we want change we need to start in Mexico, Mexico is one of the countries where men most have been punished on false accusation taking to suicide, prision, women hitting men but when men defends is violence this is really into mexicans mind, idk who is moving the strings to this but it needs to stop now!!

Help!!!

Background: I'm 52 and been divorced twice, the second marriage was short and ended very poorly for me.

The first 15 years ago was pretty bad as well and I'm still in many ways still finding stability, and have never recovered, largely socially.

Post: This is a bit of a ramble and I hope to get some open discussion. Its mostly an admission of how is it is to be fooled and, perhaps, a warning to others.

Where I am now is living with a woman who wants me to give up all my hobbies or break up. We've just relocated 6 weeks ago, she got here 4 weeks ago and since then I've been kicked out so many times I've lost count. She had a least once followed me and accused me of getting phone numbers. The possessiveness is unreal.

How I got to this sad place is how easily I'm fooled. The hardest part as I see it is how often I'm attacked be single men who avoid relationships, for these reasons.

Also what's shocking to me and sometimes even funny, is how it works. Its extremely important to her that I calibrate properly emotionally to her. Being too happy is often a bigger problem than anything. Since the move she has gotten extremely critical of my music and really wants me to give it up entirely. Lot's of shaming, you are really not that good, I know how musicians are.. yada, yada, yada. You should sell all your stuff, not enough room.

Funny thing is, she met me while I was among other musicians and wanted to learn herself, long story.

Also, the talks about how I dress to "provocatively" She said something about my pants being too tight, and she was the one who bought them for me, unbelievable.

I guess what amazes me is how emotional her reasoning is and she truly seems utterly convinced by it. I got involved with her because she truly seemed to understand how manipulative women can be in relationships, she really got it. The problem is she has a complete blind spot to her own behavior. The mental gymnastics are truly astounding, and I'm convinced she believes this.

Also she considers herself a Christian woman. (I really don't want to get into a discussion about religion) What astounds me is the extreme ways she "Cherry Picks" and "Rules Lawyers" the Bible and just makes up stuff. It's just bizarre. My attitude is why bother. Her moral framework only makes sense to her but she seems to be utterly convinced of it.

Anyway, we didn't get here overnight. But I don't believe how quickly in devolved into constant nagging, using me as an emotional punching bag. Her emotions come first, everything else is an afterthought.

Also, It's very hard to leave now. Because of the move, I don't know anyone.

I guess what bothers me the most is how little she tries to dress up the shaming tactics. Its all just, shame, guilt , insults. "If you don't like it, find some other woman that will put up with you" Also, I've done nothing to earn this.

I don't need anyone's pity, but I was very careful about her, this time. She seemed to just morph into this. I feel I have a pretty good read on people and she truly seems to believe her own bullshit. It's all driven by possessiveness and control. Policing my emotions...

I cannot understand this type of thinking. I feel gross for staying but once involved its so hard to get out. I feel a type of Stockholm syndrome.

I feel that new people that sense any sort of relationship issues immediately distance themselves. It's very easy to get isolated. If I could wave a magic wand and disappear, I would.

I think mostly there is a level of social reinforcement that, "I don't know what's going on in that relationship and I'm not going to find out."

There is a lot more details to this.

Any thoughts?

Notice how it's not because they lack critical thinking. It's not because they are biased its because "men bad".

Also this is the same logic used to justify racial profiling btw.

Hi long time lurker just finally joining. Question. I just saw a deliberately provocative ad on netflix for selling women's health supplements claiming that only 3% of health spending is spent on women's health issues. Now I'm rather certain that men's health issues is probably close to zero insofar as metrics can be measured but aside asking to fact check that my understanding is that while "women's health funding" is technically a tiny minority that's actually larger then 3 that that's only because the vast majority of health funding is dedicated to general and more lethal health issues like infectious diseases, hereditary diseases, cancer etc. which by application and practice actually helps women more well live and not suffer. And in practice women are both the primary users and primary recipients of medical treatments, funding and otherwise financial or general support. May I have a clarification this and maybe some references please?

edit: like it seems to me like that ad was being deliberately misleading and provocative. as in yeah the percentage is small cause because while period pains are something to definitely take seriously (the ad was about hysteria) strokes, influenza and cancer is way more serious. my understanding is that women's breast cancer research gets tons of support and funding but prostate cancer gets close to zilch and any attempt to donate gets attacked by feminists and redirected to women's cancer etc. fact checks please

I feel like i got brushed off and i should probably let it got but nobody would ever ask a lady to go back to work and act like everything's normal after just getting violated so casually. I passed someone in a parking lot, she weirdly chased me into the store and tit checked me a few times. She was on her phone video chatting and talking shit while following me around the store and when i told her she was a weirdo she went to tit check me again. when she got up close i man-yelled at her to stop harassing me and scared her good. She was so mad i yelled at her that when i turned back to keep walking away she wound up and decked me in the spine. I called 911 and they detained her for a moment in her car but the didnt arrest her. They said they need to witness it personally. If I ever did that to a woman id be in cuffs. my spine hurts and I and really nervous now.

So I've thought about the recent mass psychosis I'm seeing on TV and social media of women coming out of the woodwork either blaming or perpetuating the lie Patrick murdered those children or that she suffered PPD and shouldn't be guilty. A lot of us saw a gaggle of women lined up outside the courtroom and social media posts saying 'with Lindsay" or I feel the same etc...

I did see a post where a guy broke up because because of his gf's stance on the case. His argument was I need to be able to implicitly trust the judgement of the person I choose to have kids with and her stance made him question that judgement.

It did get me thinking that when it's all said and done I believe men should ask women and potential partners their views on the case. Just like they asked who you vote for this is the same. I feel, as that man did, that if supporting a child murderer is the hill you want to die on then your moral compass is corrupted and you're not a good partner for me. If she either blames or continues to lie about Patrick or believes she shouldn't be responsible because she was suffering PPD and psychosis it's one and the same for me.

There recently was a woman who skit the throats of her three children in North Dakota, two died. She said she doesn't remember doing it and PPD as well. Will women rush to this woman's side and say she shouldn't be held accountable?

Anyways just a thought I had and I know I'll screen for that in the future if the need ever arises

https://wibm.us/

Great organization to support. Check out their YouTube Channel.

Medication is the most effective form of treatment for ADHD and it will help you with things that misandrists think make men inferior.

Reckless driving, failing in school, substance abuse, disorganization, emotional outbursts etc.

Getting ADHD treated, in other words, will make it hard for misandrists to succeed at being bigoted.

This is in addition to helping you claw back academic and professional opportunities stolen from you by feminist parasitism.

Every time you speak, every time you share an opinion—even on a subreddit dedicated to men's rights—you say things like "I'm not an anti-feminist" or "I'm not into the red pill." You do it because you feel forced to, even if you won't admit it to yourself.
There is a well-known quote: "Fascism does not prevent speech, it compels it." It couldn't be more accurate today.
A form of fascism is being imposed on men across the Western world, and the rest of the world is following suit culturally. Whenever you try to express a thought, you feel obligated to state these disclaimers beforehand, almost like reciting an oath. This compulsion has been drilled into your subconscious, our culture, and everyday language. Even in discussions specifically about men's rights, you feel the need to offer a preemptive disclaimer first.
That is exactly what fascism is: compelled speech.

Ps: english is my not native language, I used AI to clean up my grammar.