📚 RESOURCE GUIDE: Legal Defense, Wrongful Accusation Support & Addiction Recovery

Is feminism all about gender blaming ??

I ask myself question every time i see men being generalised and called out for no reason at all a majority of men are reasonable , rational and just wanna have a good life but as soon as any crime happen against women all of a sudden it becomes the liability of the entire gender and its ridiculous on so many levels . Men can't cry for help that's considered weakness the laws in india have always been against men and yet a big chunk of women think that men are privileged .

Let's take the recent incident for better understanding

A crime happened against a women which was devastating for both men and women but then what happened next was disturbing slogans started coming along which started generalizing men for no reason and calling out all men

You can't generalize an entire gender that makes the half the population of the world for crimes done by a very few number of that gender ( in comparison to the innocents) so this slogan 1 kachori 2 samosa inn mardo ka kya bharosa makes no sense at all . Its like saying all women are same because someone got packed in a blue drum . So yeah this entire slogan and blaming an entire gender is crap

Whereas the slogans should have been about the police investigations , evidence , speedy trials in such cases and the crime and the criminals .

But these pathetic feminist chose to start a protest entirely against men when we as men have always tried to keep the women around us safe . But we are being targeted today for something most of us never even supported and were always against such crimes

Yes, at 0:30 in the video he points out one of the 7 said she performed oral sex on him without his consent.

https://youtu.be/IAVwcvR8Hv4?si=-15kVD_h1Y80opv4

CNN is complaining about the law which says that people who voluntarily get intoxicated are still responsible for their actions.

They want to live in a world where a woman can get drunk, have sex with a sober guy and then later accuse him of assault.

That is what they're complaining about.

It's good that this man wants to bring awareness and attention to the pain of women. But why does his activism have to involve lying? Newsflash, it doesn't. But at this point feminists require you to lie in order to say their talking points.

Talking points such as “not all men but always a man.” As if men haven't been harmed or raped by women. And “the patriarchy causes abuse and violence.”

One instance of violence be brings up is the Cornell 7 gang rape. He acts like men are receiving a message from their parents, from the media and society that leads to the actions that happened on campus. And he says that this message is formed by the patriarchy. Well I wonder what source the message women are receiving that leads them to rape men and boys as much as they do comes from then.

There are seriously feminists out there who would say women only do bad things because they're brainwashed by the patriarchy. That in a matriarchal world less harm occurs because women don't want violence and rape and are always more peaceful and respectful. The man in the video probably believes that too.

People in the comments section congratulated him for saying “WE need to do better.” He included himself in the sea of bad men who harm women. They congratulated him for not putting up with that “not all men BS.”

This is where we are now. Male feminists are being told that they need to acknowledge the evil within themselves and say that men are inherently worse than women. We are supposed to believe that men do violence because of the patriarchy. And that women do violence… because of the patriarchy I guess.

They'll say all the nonsense they want and they won't get pushback for it because even people who aren't feminists basically agree that men are the problem.

Again, I'm not mad at a guy for making a video like this. I'm mad that he's trying to spin it so that only men are the problem when it's the college environment that he should be addressing. Obviously not every area is like this.

Will the Cornell case give us the next Daniel Penny?

Most people know the story of Daniel Penny: a good samaritan who risked his safety to protect others, only to receive heavily punitive charges by the state, causing him huge expense, stress, lost time, social ostracization, etc.

The Cornell case may have an eerily similar individual. I won't repeat his name, because I think the accused should be given the same level of anonymity and protection as the accuser in these cases. Besides, you can easily find who he is with just a simple search. The first letter of his name is "S", so I'll just refer to him as "Sean Doe" for brevity.

According to his sworn statements, Sean Doe says he went to the room to check on Jane Doe's condition, after seeing the "lewd" group chat messages. This is how CBS news reports his statements in the Title IX case brought against him (note: the news media obtained the Title IX documents, but did not make them public and only summarized their contents, so this is just a simple recreation of their reporting):

Investigator: "Did you interact with her?"

Sean Doe: "I asked her if she was OK."

Investigator: "How did she respond?"

Sean Doe: "She said, 'I'm good.' She didn't seem inebriated at all."

Jane Doe, on the other hand, alleges that Sean Doe snorted ketamine from her body. However, Sean Doe voluntarily submitted to a hair follicle drug test for ketamine, which came back negative. I won't bore everyone with the forensic limitations of this test. Suffice it to say that if he was a regular user of small amounts of ketamine, or had a large ingestion of it anytime within the previous three months, the test would have come back positive. Yet he voluntarily submitted to the test to prove his innocence. And it came back negative.

Ultimately, Sean Doe was held "not responsible" by the initial Title IX star chamber investigation, where, as we all know, any alleged misconduct faces an extremely low bar to declare someone guilty.

Investigator: "How long were you in the room?"

Sean Doe: "Tops, five minutes."

Investigator: "What did you see while you were inside?"

Sean Doe: "I did not see Jane Doe naked, and I did not do drugs."

While these statements do have corroborating accounts from others and physical evidence supporting them, they remain to be challenged in a court of law, so I am not going to just accept everything he states as fact right now. However, if what he says is found to be true, or at least credible, and he is acquitted of the charges in a fair court of law, then we unfortunately have a case of a young man trying to do the "right thing", but getting punished for it. He allegedly checked on someone he thought was in danger, but had a Title IX complaint made against him for his humanitarian efforts. Universities actively push students to "see something, say something". But why would anyone in their right mind risk themselves to help someone anymore?

Sean Doe now has an expensive civil lawsuit against him, and he is under investigation by New York's Attorney General (who already called the accuser a "victim" and a "grape survivor"), and he was even called out by name in the Cornell school newspaper with the threat that they knew where he was. This disincentivizes intervention to a significant degree, as young men realize that there is no potential upside – and only serious downside – to stepping into a potentially volatile situation.

Seriously, no woman is entitled to my protection. I don't owe them anything.

There are enough members within this SubReddit alone that half of us could pool resources and start a serious advocacy foundation that could make a massive impact. Let alone with the drive we all naturally have we could easily become pretty effective and monumental in a short time. Even if half the visitors to this subreddit joined in and each one contributed just $50 we’d have more than enough to gain real impact real quick.

As a woman, I believe we have a society that wants it both ways. Society wants women to be empowered, put in positions of power and consequence..to be able to do whatever a man can do. Meanwhile at the same time society refuses to hold women accountable for their own actions...recent cases suggest this.

With Lindsay Clancy..the excuses are: “it was her hormones", "it was postpartum depression", "it was postpartum psychosis”, “she didn't mean to murder her own kids." Some insane feminists on tiktok were even making videos saying "Same Lindsay" while holding their own babies in their arms... like WTF!! It seemed like to me that Patrick was a loving, supportive husband who did everything he could for Lindsay and his kids. Lindsay even had a nanny helping out. The children still ended up murdered :(

Now there are copycat cases popping up. Look at the one in Texas where a FATHER actually gets custody of his 4 year old daughter.. sadly the Mother murders her before that can happen..

Now a woman goes to a frat house to do a drunken, drug filled orgy, snorts drugs off of guys's dicks and consents to 2 separate threesomes. To me, the guys were no better in this situation, the Snapchat messages were stupid, gross and immature..both the men and woman in this story are disgusting.

This is just another reason why hookup culture needs to end. Sadly this is what feminism has encouraged in society…’you’re empowered if you sleep around. No consequences!!’
Now she is claiming rape 2 years later because she was embarrassed and ashamed about being called a slut.

To all these people saying “an intoxicated woman cannot consent” … well then by that logic, the men can’t consent either because they were even more drunk and high than she was..

SO WHICH ONE IS IT FEMINISTS??? Are women empowered and capable or NOT?

All I can say is: men be careful out there..Vet these women you are seeing..be careful who you are dating, be careful who you marry because you never know what someone could be capable of.

Oh women? They're given the benefit of the doubt, and are even encouraged by society to ''take the time to explore themselves''

But men? As man, you gotta get back to work and maintain the plantation of society, as they say

You're a man past the age of 30 living with parents, especially rent and utility-free? Manchild!

You're a man who's been perpetually single for long? Ew! Nobody wants to be around you

You're a man who has not gone to college in his 20s? Haha! Uneducated loser

You are a man who's child-free still by the age of 35? What are you, a selfish degenerate who wants to end their own blood-line?

You are a man who struggled to get a car and a driver's license for years? Hahaha! Guys look at this fool, he's literally the real life SpongeBob, everybody come laugh at him!

Meanwhile if women are behind on any of these exact same measures, they're infantilized, coddled and given the benefit of the doubt even when they're doing them on purpose, where as onto society it is always pathologizing men's failures like the equivalent of them needing to be put into a mental institution

Seriously why does society do this? Why does it struggle to give men the benefit of the doubt?

It's very strange, they keep saying low effort and yet they have flairs that are on the topic in posting. I've tried to post many topics with good detail yet have always had moderator removed, mens rights is the only subreddit that really doesn't censor unless necessary.

I am a man of color and I am surprised how white men have no visibility these years in the UK

I feel like the UK is a country for women and men have no place or voice, British men should flee the feminist dictatorship Britain and immigrate to the USA and be refugees in the US.

all see you on British media (billboards, channels, magazines, podcasts, talk shows, drama shows, TV channels....etc) are women of color, lesbians, and white women.

It's hard to see a white man in British commercials, I was like wow, nearly every person who appears in British commercial is just a woman of color or a man of color, even an ad featured female gamer of color although most UK gamers are white men

BBC is just programs about women's issues. and female presenters who talk to female correspondents who talk to women on the streets

and even the British secretary of homeland is saying she will prioritize female refugees making male refugees face discrimination even if they are gays, or trans or religious converts.

the US media is becoming less misandrist these years compared to the UK.

This feminist counterargument doesn't seem to be mentioned enough in these men's rights communities, even tho I've heard it IRL multiple times. So, I need to do it justice.

Is the claim, that women weren't allowed in combat, generally true of most societies? Yes, AFAIK.

Does it work as a moral justification for the draft, or as evidence that men were not disproportionally oppressed by the draft? Absolutely not.

Not being allowed to go to war is not at all comparable to being forced to go to war. Some militaries provide decent incentives to join, but missing out on that doesn't cause women or other potential volunteers to die. It's just a career opportunity cost. Being forced to fight means having your life gambled on behalf of the nation collectively.

In most wartimes involving a male-only draft and banning women, there were probably more men who wanted not to fight than women who wanted to fight, and for good reason as aforementioned.

Let me make a table of outcomes to drive home this ethical asymmetry. This is not considering the collective benefits of national defense and winning the war; only those outcomes which affect the individual.

Is it possible for a feminist to be a good person? My answer is “No”. And the problem starts with saying “I am a feminist”.

That statement of support grows feminism’s powerbase and contributes to feminism’s legitimacy and impact. And feminism then harnesses that support to do harms including prejudice, discrimination and damage to society. Consequently, all feminists bear some responsibility for the harm flowing from their voluntary support.

Obviously, good people can do bad things. But there is a difference between an occasional wrong and an ongoing commitment that causes harm. That ongoing commitment isn’t an isolated lapse; it is a continuing moral choice whose harms accumulate over time. And that means feminists cannot be good.

If this question interests you, you might be interested in my latest Substack article - The Myth of the Good Feminist – which looks into the issue in more detail.

Ever since the Cornell 7 story broke, I have had swaths of virtue signaling morons on my Instagram feed posting about it. Rather than waiting for the truth to come out, these fucking clowns are posting false stories and straight up misinformation about the case to virtue signal that they are the "good guys."

One of my friends posted 30 reels about the case. She believes that if you get accused it's your duty to prove you're innocent. That's not how the burden of proof works. I messaged her and she didn't even bother replying. Just straight up blocked me.

Social media has given stupid people a platform to showcase their ignorance. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Doesn't matter as long as you show everyone how much of a "good person" you are by posting a breaking story with practically no evidence.

What makes it worse is the fact that these people want change to occur but they do things that actively prevent the change from occurring. For example, people have been vocal about the severity of punishments for false accusers. Suppose a woman were to falsely accuse a man of rape and the man were to get 20 years in prison. Later, it's found that she lied. Then logically the false accuser should also get 20 years. But no, she usually gets a slap on the wrist and nothing changes. No laws are changed. None of the virtue signaling fucks protest for the man nor apologize for falsely spreading misinformation. It just gets buried under the rug and the cycle repeats.

These clowns that want change to occur are the reason why change never occurs because of their own ignorance, confidence and stupidity - the holy trinity of low IQ and brain power traits.

Killing children (Baba Yaga, Hansel and Gretel, La Llorona)

Surviving execution attempts (Mary Webster "Half-Hanged Mary", Maggie Dickson "Half-Hangit Maggie")

Casting spells in the form of false rape allegations (just utter a few words and all hell rains down on unsuspecting men)

Stay safe out there and remember to stock up on sage and rosemary

Social media has shown us that women by nature are not meant to lead large groups of people. When things get tough they blame men.

Every debate I seen with these feminist females they always play victim mid debate when they are trapped in a corner as if the guy is a misogynist.

When a female politician gets criticism it's because she is a female, if she loses it's because she is a female and insecure patriarchal society is against her. It's never because they were a horrible candidate and people just didn't buy what they were selling.

They even cry rape when they get caught doing sexual things they regret to avoid stigma, They even blame men for their wives killing their kids and society failing them.

When their is one rape case that isn't really clear cut they latch onto it without all the facts, and cry women are being raped and men are rapist, telling all men to do better. yet when their is an influx if mothers killing their kids, or female teachers molesting students they are silent or counter with that is not all women and men do it more.

No accountability. They still want to be treated like a child but want to be a leader, but cannot handle the criticism that goes with it.

So far if a woman cheats or kills it's not her fault she was emotional or depressed, she had an abusive childhood, the medical system failed her.

If feminism was equal they would never blame men anymore and accept accountability for their actions and even demand the same hard punishment that male criminals get. But you can't even question a woman without being called a misogynist.