r/RadicalEgalitarianism

Consider this a critique of all gender issue movements, from Egalitarians, Feminists and MRAs, but more largely a consistent failure of the advocates and adherents. Whether it be the ivory-towered academics and Ph.D level instructor, all the way down to the lowliest high school student unexperienced, uninformed and relying solely upon whatever Pathos inspired argument sways them, there is something that continually stands out to me when discussion starts.

It doesn't matter if its the Red-Pill Chugging Dude-Bro Supplement pusher or the stuffy, blue-haired, septum-pierced and tattooed pink-hatter, both tend to fail at a very simple action. The acknowledgment of another's pain or lived experience.

I assume all of you nodded your heads at the assertion that your opponent fails to understand the pain that your side experiences. Most of us have, had that moment where someone of the opposite gender or the opposite ideology simply stood up during a discussion and without data, without statistics, without any shred of evidence simply dismissed you. "That didn't happen", "That's not true." "You're making things up.", amongst a host of other synonymous statements.

I am a man. And like many, many men that I have known. I spent the majority of formative teenage years and into my early adult life 15-22, having numerous comments made about my body. Both sexually charged and derisive. This has lead to body dismorphic disorder. Oscillating between disgust and fear at times trying to keep myself from being overweight, but not highly desirable as I have very little interested in sexual relations.

I've been told by more women than I can count, that I just need to get over it and that what would be construed as sexual assault towards a woman, is just a complement, or I should be grateful it happened. This has been said to me not only in this context, but as a rape-victim that was drugged and had the act disseminated to the internet.

On the same token, it hasn't just been women that have said it. But there has been many, many, many times that those pushing against gender norms and saying they want to push towards a gender neutral society through the lens of Feminism, have rejected that those incidents happened or that they are even common. It is a denial of my very lived existence, and a push away from me expressing how society has failed me, and how I might want resources that are normally reserved only for women.

MRAs and men are not innocent of this sin either. No one here needs me to tell them that there are some men out there who would view that all as being some "irresistible stud", or would hear about the same things happening to women and respond with the same level of dismissiveness.

And there in lies a major problem with either end of our gender spectrum. The vast majority of the discourse purposefully blinds itself to the problems advocates or in some cases, the opposite gender brings up. They look towards their own gender like a new born looks upon the world. Seeing the problem presented and nodding, because their lived experience reinforces it as a reality; however, when the sheet of paper that is the opposite gender covers the problem, suddenly, the problem no longer exists.

Obfuscating many of these ideas further is often how faulty, one sided, cherry-picked or many times just out right ancient much of our research and data into these issues are. To say nothing of the semantic games that get played, societal pressures and the self-reported surveys that get produced. Only further complicated by the varying desires of each individual.

As this community inevitably grows or crumbles, I want to encourage everyone to push towards a simple idea. A simple course of action, if we truly want positive discussion and discourse. If want to find some middle-ground or healthy form of debate.

We can not simply dismiss. While the adage of Hitchen's Razor is a reddit favorite, "What can be presented without evidence, can also be dismissed without evidence", it often simply falls apart in gender discussions. Because the burden of producing most of the evidence for these issues now, comes primarily from anecdotes and personal experiences. We also can not just out of hand dismiss studies with data we don't like. We have to be able to engage with it, or pinpoint WHY the study was bad or faulty.

Failure to assume good faith, failure to address a study as valid without proving invalidity and most of all simply turning every conversation into a "who has it worse", serves no other purpose than to win a pissing contest and create endless "whataboutisms", that address no issues and widen the divide in gender discussion and issues.

I'm making this post, because I've noticed some misconceptions about this subreddit or the purpose of this subreddit.

First of all, you don't have to subscribe to "radical egalitarianism" to participate in this subreddit, or agree with it on everything.

Radical egalitarianism, depending on the perspective of the radical egalitarian, is either a form of feminism, or is a distinct ideology from feminism that borrows aspects of different branches of feminism, as well as combining this with left-wing male advocacy. I personally fall into the second camp, for example.

There are five ways you could conceptualize gender issues:

1. Only women are oppressed by our gender system, and if men are harmed at all, it is a mere side effect

2. Women are more oppressed than men by our gender system

3. Men and women are roughly equally oppressed by our gender system

4. Men are more oppressed by our gender system

5. Only men are oppressed by our gender system, and if women are harmed at all, it is a mere side effect

This subreddit allows perspectives 2, 3, and 4, but not perspectives 1 and 5.

Feminists would tend to agree with either perspective 1 or 2, egalitarians would tend to agree with perspective 3, and MRAs would tend to agree with either perspective 4 or 5.

Male advocates would tend to agree with either 3, 4, or 5.

This subreddit allows egalitarians, feminists, and male advocates / MRAs to participate. It's also perfectly fine to believe one sex is more oppressed/harmed by gender issues than the other.

Oppression score-keeping is more about dismissing the problems of one sex or gender, and promoting perspectives 1 and 5 on our subreddit. The "No oppression score-keeping rule" also allows for good-faith discussion of differing impacts on groups.

We're still trying to fully figure out the purpose of our subreddit. Is it a debate subreddit, a discussion subreddit, a combination of both, or something else?

We're also still trying to come to a mod consensus about what should be removed and what shouldn't.

I personally believe that this subreddit should err on the side of free speech, and just remove posts and comments that pretty clearly violate the rules.

I have seen this in almost all spaces. But mens worth it seems always tied to his height. Which many times height means looks.

Why is this? Even with people that believe gender is a social construct and body shaming is bad. Yet they mock and place men's worth on height.

Women are less likely to recieve CPR than men from bystanders. This is due to multiple factors, including fear of being accused of sexual assault, having more discomfort with touching a woman's chest to perform CPR, the perception that women are more "frail" than men, and being less likely to recognize that a woman is experiencing cardiac arrest, such as due to misperceptions that cardiac arrests primarily affect men.

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided not to restrict the nationwide mailing of the abortion drug mifepristone. After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that abortion is not a constitutional right in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization in 2022, medication abortion continued to be available in states that banned abortion due to being shipped from states where it is legal.

A 19th century federal anti-obscenity law called the Comstock Act was invoked in Justice Thomas's dissent, and it was mentioned by both Justice Thomas and Justice Alito during 2024 oral arguments in a case about mifepristone.

According to Wikipedia, "The Comstock Act of 1873 is a series of current provisions in federal law that generally criminalize the involvement of the United States Postal Service, its officers, or a common carrier in conveying obscene matter, crime-inciting matter, or certain abortion-related matter."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock\_Act\_of\_1873

The Comstock Act is not enforced by the federal government regarding abortion.

https://x.com/TheTinMenBlog/status/2048048508062634078

After this tweet was published, a huge number of feminist reposts appeared, claiming that wars and forceful mobilizations and conscriptions are only men's guilt and women are not blame for anything. Even though women weren't mentioned at all in this post. It was also accompanied by a huge amount of gaslighting and ridicule towards men. It's high time to evaluate whether this is true, especially in 2026.

The most common claim that women don't start wars. However, historians debunked it. Quotation from Tanya Basu's book "European Queens waged more wars than Kings" reports that "28 European queenly reigns from 1480 to 1913 and found a 27 percent increase in wars when a queen was in power, as compared to the reign of a king."

The majority of women voted for male-only conscription in referendums in Austria and Switzerland.

Female president of Lithuania actively promoted male-only conscription in 2015.

Female leaders of Brazil, Switzerland, Finland, South Korea, Taiwan, Moldova, Turkey, Myanmar, etc. haven't abolished conscription and haven't made it gender neutral.

Feminists canceled MRAs they are all far right, homophobes, transphobes (while it's European feminism is rapidly becoming homophobic and transphobic). That's why people are even afraid of calling this misandrist horror out.

And finally we need to address to not only the indifference but even the mockery of the thousands of adbucted men. Do they really have no male relatives at all? And after all this, feminists demand that men support their issues?

This is blatant sexism! Who will speak about it?

https://x.com/including_women

When I came across this page, I was really shocked that there were so many examples of this sexist phrase. It is not "still" at all. It is "nothing has changed since Titanic".

Are male lives less valuable? if so, men are oppressed. Nothing matters than live.

Is it because of patriarchy? So why is the progressive BBC promoting patriarchy?

And why don't all the gender equality advocates criticize BBC and other media for this?

Why “Sensitive Men” Often Love to Provoke and Downplay Male Suffering

The Paradox
When issues like male loneliness, fathers’ rights, or men’s problems are discussed, the strongest opposition often comes not from women, but from men who strongly identify with feminist and progressive values. These “sensitive men” frequently react with more hostility than the female critics themselves. They derive their moral authority from distancing themselves from traditional masculinity. Their zeal is not rooted in genuine moral strength, but in a fragile sense of identity and an inner compulsion.

This behavior has deep roots in what psychoanalyst André Green called the Dead Mother Complex. When a mother is emotionally absent or unavailable in a boy’s early years, it creates profound narcissistic wounds. The child experiences an “emotional desert” and internalizes it as his own fault — a sense of inadequacy and guilt. The mother hinders healthy individuation, often turning the son into a parentified “little adult.” This dynamic frequently leads to Nice Guy Syndrome (as described by Dr. Robert Glover). At its core, the Nice Guy tries to earn love and approval through constant “niceness” — a strategy of emotional bribery rooted in the childhood need for maternal validation.

Progressive activism then becomes a substitute identity. The “White Knight” positions himself as an enlightened ally, engaging in performative self-criticism (“I acknowledge my toxic masculinity”). This is rarely driven by true conviction. Instead, it follows a “Giving-to-Get” logic: he hopes that being the “good guy” will bring him social status and sexual rewards.

However, this strategy usually backfires. By suppressing his own masculinity out of fear of being seen as toxic, the Nice Guy kills any sexual tension. His partner often ends up attracted to the very kind of self-assured, masculine man he publicly condemns.

This creates intense cognitive dissonance. To protect his fragile ego from collapsing, he must distort reality.

The Projection Mechanism
The suppressed anger, envy, and sexual frustration cannot be aimed at women. Instead, they are released through projective identification:

• He splits off his own “dark” feelings (anger, lust, resentment).
• He projects them onto the “toxic man” — the socially acceptable scapegoat.
• He provokes this man with moral attacks (“patriarch,” “right-wing,” “misogynist”), deliberately pushing his buttons until the other reacts with anger.
• He then feels triumphant: the “evil” has been exposed in the other person, while his own self-image as the good, sensitive man remains intact.

His hatred is so intense and irrational because it serves as a psychological defense. It protects the brittle construction of his identity. The empathy he loudly proclaims is often self-referential. Paradoxically, the more intensely he feels empathetic, the poorer his actual empathy tends to be — and the more distorted his view of reality becomes.

The current US‑led assault on Iran — encouraged privately by Saudi Arabia, confirmed by the New York Times and by President Trump — is not a “war for democracy.” It is the military clearance for a 2,300‑year imperial project: Western control of the land bridge that connects the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean.

Zionism is not mainly a Jewish nationalist movement. It is the forward operating base of a Euro‑American empire that has been trying to seize and hold that corridor since Alexander the Great marched through the Levant.

Today, May 7, The Governor of Tennessee has signed a law which will be used to create a public list of trans people in the state.

By December of 2026, Tennessee will release a dataset based on the records of all people who medically transition in the state. This dataset will contain all medical information corresponding to a real person’s trans healthcare, the dates at which they received such care, the clinic(s) at which the care is given, as well as any “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions” that the patient has. 

While the dataset will not have the person’s name or address attached to it, it is trivial to cross-reference the dataset with existing public data to confirm that the person is trans, and learn any number of medical details about them.

It does this through what it calls a “right to public transparency”. In practice, this means releasing an un-aggregated dataset on patients receiving trans healthcare. This can then be combined with publicly available sources to create a list of trans people in the state.

While other state governments have assembled lists of trans people, none have released any pieces of that list to the public, even in a semi-anonymous form such as what Tennessee is doing.

This law is arguably the worst anti-trans law passed in the US in decades, as it will be trivial to publicly out at least 10,000 trans people once the list is released.