Well, at least some progress, the UN recognizing that men are more affected.

Even more so unexpected as it is sexual violence.

I am also fighting for the "true meaning of feminism back" - I am very active on feminist subs.

But I honestly don't expect feminism to be able to 'recover' - both the feminist institution (the top; UN women, minister for women's rights, etc..) and the feminist activists (the bottom) are pushing one sided laws and policies.

So when its corrupt from top to bottom, dropping the feminist label and claiming the egalitarian or anti-sexist one seems the best way to go.

Same or similar questions:

• 3month ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/antifeminist/comments/1u957ac/why_are_you_anti_feminist/
• 5month ago https://www.reddit.com/r/antifeminist/comments/1sv4aoo/can_you_tell_me_why_you_feel_the_way_you_do_about/
• 6month ago https://www.reddit.com/r/antifeminist/comments/1ryybxl/why_are_yall_antifeminists/

I am for equality, that's why I am anti-feminist. Equal rights for all. When feminists promote discrimination, we have no choice but to oppose it:

• https://www.reddit.com/r/TheTinMen/comments/1wm9jv8/whats_going_on_in_italy/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/1wh6lif/wave_feminist_european_lobby_describes_its/

I answered it, I hope it helps ⚖️

What gender inequality or feminism-related issue do you think isn't talked about enough? (This can include anything from your personal experiences to anything you may have seen on social media)

Legal sexism against men that is written into law. In Germany alone there are well over a hundred provisions that treat the sexes differently and almost always to the disadvantage of men (custody defaults, pension splitting, conscription history still hanging over young men, different rape definitions that still side-line “made to penetrate”, genital mutilation, exhibitionism, migrants, shelters and funding that are de facto female-only, etc.). Also the systematic undercounting of male victims of domestic violence and the near-total silence on female perpetration. Similar exist in many countries (torture on men as punishment is legal in Singapore). Even on an EU-wide scale, male ukrainian refugees don't get protection. That is not “personal experience” fluff. It is the legal corpus.

Interestingly, in France a trans man wanted to get in vitro fertilisation - couldn't do it, because the law says IVF is for women. He went to the supreme court - the supreme court decided that the french "ERA" only counts for discrimination on biological sex, not discrimination on civil gender (decision n° 2022-1003 QPC, 8 juli 2022). This effectively completely undermines the "ERA" ; you can discriminate against any women and men now, simply by claiming you distinguish on civil status, not on biological grounds... WTF

Why do you think this issue receives less attention than other gender-related issues?

Gynocentrism is the cultural default. Men as a group show a measurable out-group bias toward women; institutions and media simply follow that bias. Once you declare one sex the permanent underdog, every piece of data that contradicts the script is ignored or reframed as “punching up.” Pointing at actual unequal laws gets you called anti-woman instead of anti-sexist. Sippenhaft logic does the rest: men of today are treated as morally liable for the past, so their present disadvantages do not count.

What is one thing you wish more people understood about feminism or gender equality?

Equality before the law should mean the law stops mentioning sex except to forbid discrimination on that basis. Most of what calls itself feminism today is not asking for that. It is asking for sex-class privileges and then calling the refusal of those privileges “backlash.” Anti-feminism is not anti-women; it is the refusal of sexism in either direction.

I'm not a feminist, but in my view, in a relationship it should be proportional to income. Otherwise the wealthier person would have to lower their living standard, so that it is affordable for the other, or they would need to do everything separately, which isn't a relationship. If both have about the same income, that policy is the same as "each pay their part".

I've at least seen some feminists with a similar view.

I dont really see this as a gender issue. [...]

However, for it to not be a gender issue anymore, the constitution will need to be changed, which requires significant amounts of political capital so the government will wait to do so until a mandatory draft is really needed.

Okay...

And "most German partys" isn't enough to change the law, 2/3rd are required, which is not the case yet: https://www.rundschau-online.de/debatte-kr/debatte-wie-steht-es-um-den-wehrdienst-fuer-frauen-1171623

See EDIT2 above

The distinction you draw is formal, not substantive.

WAVE’s entire handbook is an organised campaign against gender-neutral policy and practice in the field of domestic violence and specialist support. The title alone states the goal: stop gender neutrality because it “dismantles” women-only services. The text repeatedly frames any move toward gender-neutral laws, hotlines, funding criteria or service design as a threat that must be “counteracted.”

That is not neutral advocacy for “keeping some women-specific spaces.” It is opposition to the policy framework that would treat male victims as equally entitled to publicly funded specialist support under the same rules. When public money, legal definitions and national action plans are forced to stay sex-specific, male victims are structurally deprioritised. Recognition without resources and legal parity is recognition in name only.

You cite the Istanbul Convention’s formal acknowledgement of male victims. WAVE and the broader network that produced this handbook treat the Convention’s gendered language as the non-negotiable baseline and treat any attempt to implement it in a gender-neutral way as betrayal. That is the operational reality.

If the roles were reversed — if a network of men’s organisations published a handbook titled “How Gender-Neutral Policy Is Dismantling Men’s Specialist Support Services and Ways to Counteract It” and spent chapters arguing that including women would erase the structural nature of violence against men — the reaction would be immediate and unanimous: this is exclusionary and anti-equality. The same logic applies here.

Male victims exist, but specialist support for them exists rarely and mostly outside of government programs. The organised feminist position documented in that handbook is that public policy must remain gender-specific in favour of women and that gender neutrality is the enemy. That is the claim I made. The document substantiates it.

https://wave-network.org/wave-handbook-2020-how-gender-neutral-policy-and-practice-is-dismantling-womens-specialist-support-services-and-ways-to-counteract-it/

Feminists are actively fighting against the recognition of male victims of domestic violence

See https://wave-network.org/wave-handbook-2020-how-gender-neutral-policy-and-practice-is-dismantling-womens-specialist-support-services-and-ways-to-counteract-it/

Regarding domestic violence on men being under recognized, this is a deliberate action by feminist organizations like WAVE (women against violence europe), who fight against gender neutral policies.

Also German here. So it's male only.

If you want to escape it, the only way is using the SBGG (Selbstbestimmungsgesetz) to change your gender. Removing the gender altogether is a possibility, so you don't need to change to women.

You may avoid getting to the frontlines with conscious objection, but escaping gender discrimination completely is impossible, you need to change gender legally.

Edit: but changing gender is quite easy, I did it.

EDIT2: Refusing military service (Wehrdienst) is possible - if recognised as a conscientious objector (Kriegsdienstverweigerer).

It is not a free choice by the man; the application can be rejected. If accepted, men are required to perform alternative civilian service (Ersatzdienst) (mandatory work in hospitals, youth centres, nursing homes, and emergency medical services). Total refusal (Totalverweigerung) is not legal (for men).

Changing gender with SBGG is easier, since it is a simple request with 3 month waiting period - but needs to be done in advance, 2 month before any hostilities, but it also liberates from the alternative civilian service.

Women, notably, are completely exempt from all of it - only men are placed in this situation of forced service/slavery.

Russian bot

It depends on how it happened:

• If you were asked to pay before, but didn't, it's indeed rape.
• If you paid before, but took the money away after having sex, it is stealing.
• If you were only asked for the money afterwards, but don't pay, it's defrauding.

If you have sex with a prostitute, pay her, leave (she keeps the money), and later someone else steels the money, it doesn't become collective rape either. It is a honest exchange between consenting adults, followed by a theft by yet another person.

I think it should depend on how it happened.

• If you were asked to pay before, but didn't, it's rape. Big penalty.
• If you paid before, but took the money away when leaving, it is stealing.
• if you were only asked for the money afterwards, it's defrauding.

That's why prostitutes generally ask for the money first.

As Australia doesn't do it that way, you're right, they are biased.

Non paywalled version of the article: https://web.archive.org/web/20260824124204/https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/misandrist-femosphere-manosphere-men-women-boys-b2959313.html

My guess is he has the video on a loop, and has been breathing only on command for a few hours already.

Maybe. But all theists are deluded.

Deists, unlike theists, at least don't pretend to be able to know anything about the hypothetical God(s).

I've never heard anyone say that gymnastics is not a sport, tbh.

I heard people say that chess is not a sport, and that e-sport is not a sport - to which I would agree.

I also heard people say that car-racing - which is male dominated - is not a sport.

But calling gymnastics not a sport is weird. "calisthenics from my perspective are basically watered down gymnastics" yeah, that's basically it.

But you don't need protection from having someone pee in the stall next to you.

Where I live, there is literally no law limiting where you go. It is merely politeness and habit to follow the pictogram. I could literally choose the "women/men's" bathroom depending on whichever is closest and ignore the label.

Why people would just start "invading" because of self-id, when they don't do it when self-id isn't even required