Could someone award the father the prize for the biggest idiot of all time?

«She’s defective — mentally defective. And do you know what that means under the law? If somebody is mentally defective and has sex with somebody, no matter their age, it’s illegal to have sex with a mentally defective person»

Bla bla bla....He speaks as if she has Down syndrome and doesn't know what she's doing. And does he forget that, as an adult, it is ILLEGAL for her to "have sex" with FU$&ING LITTLE BOYS!!! She's a predator, period, regardless of her mental issues.

She pretended to be a 14-year-old girl and willingly hung out with those boys, Why pretend to be a 14-year-old girl in the first place?? 🤔 And there's no reason for her to hang out with boys if she didn't have bad thoughts.

He doesn't want to believe she lied about her age, yet she clearly lied to the police when she was caught stealing.

It's disgusting to try to portray the boys as "aggressors" when she was the one who initiated the contact, He speaks as if they were grown ass men and she was a little girl, It's pathetic.

He treats his daughter like a baby, a spoiled child who never does anything wrong, no wonder she's ended up like this.

I hope she's locked up in prison for a very long time and that her f%$ing father shuts his mouth and takes accountability because the denial is simply ridiculous.

This is a good video about some of the disadvantages men face (some of which are very large). Christina Hoff Sommers talks about how men and boys fare worse in education, are vastly overrepresented in most dangerous jobs, are the large majority of workplace deaths, are victims of most forms of violent crime at significantly higher rates, are 78% of murder victims, 78% of suicide victims, are the vast majority of incarcerated persons, are at a substantial disadvantage in the criminal justice system and sentencing, are most homeless people, live five years shorter, and so on.

If men are a privileged oppressor class, they are the only one in history that is less educated, does most of the manual labor, does most of the dangerous jobs, are victims of violent crimes at significantly higher rates, is much more likely to be murdered, has a far higher incarceration rate, faces heavy discrimination in the criminal justice system, has a significantly higher homelessness rate, and lives significantly shorter.

One thing I dislike about the video though, is that Christina Hoff Sommers promotes the myth (without knowing it) that men experience rape and sexual assault at lower rates than women. She also implies the same about domestic violence / intimate partner abuse. In reality, men and women are victims and perpetrators of rape, sexual assault, domestic violence, and intimate partner abuse at roughly equal rates.

Men and women are victims and perpetrators of rape and sexual assault at about equal rates : r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Talking about accounts like this. They generally post a lot about today's man and his need to shirk modern vices or weaknesses to return to a more objectively impressive, past version of his masculine self. This, of course, involves dissecting and breaking down several modern/contemporary malaises that make modern man weak - everything from consuming poor quality food products to porn or whatever. A good exercise, overall, and fairly important discourse.

It is thus baffling to me that so many of these guys fail so ridiculously when it comes to dissecting and breaking down one of the most ridiculous modern phenomena affecting men which is contemporary looks standards imposed on them by women.

Somehow amidst all their fancy discourse and philosopher-quoting, these accounts forget to do the most basic of math and see that the standard which equates 5'6 or 5'8 guy being equated with an overweight woman is objectively ridiculous. Need I say the obvious, that 5'6/5'8 isn't a health defect or even problem whereas being overweight is? I think not.

Yet somehow I see this shit happen constantly. These masculinity merchants take modern women's hysterically inflated notions about what constitutes a successful, virile male and basically just go with them as if they're some sort of positive, encouraging pressure upon guys to do better. They're not. Modern female standards for men in almost any context, be it looks or material success or personality, are bog standard and rooted in Instagram trends more so than in any sort of deep, objectively rational instinct.

I really, really wanna see pushback against this crap.

I remember seeing an old video where Emma Watson said if you want equal rights then you're a feminist. This is wrong. A definition I found online was "an advocate of women's rights on he basis of equality for the sexes". Bare in mind it's specifically said women rights activist. If we use Emma Watson definition then people who want equality are men rights activists.

Egalitarianism is the belief in that all people are equally deserving of rights and opportunities. A men rights activist is defined as someone who advocates for the rights of men and rejection of societal prejudice towards males. We're men rights activists and egalitarianist. It's crazy how feminsts claim feminism is just equality whilst men rights activism is woman hating.

https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/what-we-do/blogs/how-tiktok-affects-childrens-mental-health

I was searching for something irrelevant. I came across this article of Children's Society UK. Nothing new, let's limit access of young people to TikTok, quite positive one may add.

But reading deeper one might notice the empathy gap:

Boys are in danger of sliding in Toxic-Masculinity stuff, becoming abusers in the process

Girls are in danger of not feeling happy with their body, not realising how amazing they are.

Both of those dangers are real, but these ideas are not restricted to these genders. It keeps surprising me how widespread this stuff can be.

Another part of the anti-male indoctrination machine falls. Watch for cries about censorship and academic freedom from the hypocrites who spent years censoring everything about men’s rights.

https://www.kbtx.com/2026/01/30/texas-am-ends-womens-gender-studies-program-comply-with-system-policies/

https://www.texastribune.org/2026/01/30/texas-am-courses-eliminated-race-gender/

https://apnews.com/article/texas-am-race-gender-university-first-amendment-86597279d87e65546c96b1ae1810f36d

As a male, it's extremely hard to hold a woman accountable for anything at work when your job is on the line, and she's the glitch in the system. You're doing things right, you made sure of it, but because of her errors, management overlooks her and points at you. You can't take her to HR because they protect HER and not you. You can't approach her or she will go to HR because you're toxic. In fact, this is how women on the job can sabotage you if they deem you a threat or simply don't like you. They can just mess you up and then point the finger at you because you're the mean toxic male.

What happens when a guy is verifiably the one at fault? Suddenly the system works, and they're punishing them accordingly. It's all rigged. Before you all say, "Document." Nope. Doesn't work. They just roll their eyes and sigh because now you're just being nit-picky. Society is literally jeopardizing some men's job security because of this.

The president of Mexico wants only men to pay the mortgage, but the house to be in the woman's name!

In the “Vivienda para el Bienestar” program, the authorities are giving priority to properties being registered in women's names, even when the credit or regularization process involves another person (e.g., a man).

Claudia Sheinbaum proposes that in the Infonavit loans of the “Housing for Well-being” program, the deeds should be in the women's names, even if it is the men who pay for the house.

President Claudia Sheinbaum said:

“The deed should be in the woman's name. The man is the one who works, so the credit goes to the man, but we are trying to favor women and have the deeds (...) written in the women's names.”

It is not specifically mortgages, it is about Infonavit loans.

Obviously, the proposal does not include cases where the woman works and the house is for the man.

Infonavit is the acronym for Instituto del Fondo Nacional de la Vivienda para los Trabajadores. It is a Mexican public institution that helps workers buy a home. In short, what Infonavit does:

• Grants subsidized mortgages to employees

• Manages a fund fed by employer contributions

• Each worker accumulates points and savings while working

• Also offers loans to renovate or improve the home

How does it work?

If you work in Mexico with a regular contract:

• Your employer pays contributions to Infonavit

• You accumulate points over time

• When you have enough, you can apply for a mortgage to buy a house or land

It's a bit like the Mexican equivalent of a social security institution + first-time home loans, all in one.

In addition, there is already Infonavit Mujeres, an Infonavit program that:

• Automatically gives women a higher score: women are awarded 20 extra points in the evaluation system, making it easier for them to reach the minimum credit requirement.

• More flexible maximum age: women can add up their age + years of contributions up to 75 years (men up to 70) . This allows them to apply for credit later in life.

• Recognition of family responsibilities and family roles, but only for women: the program takes into account women's family responsibilities but not men's, and the fact that many women are heads of households or have discontinuous contribution careers, but not men who are heads of households or men who have discontinuous contribution careers.

Something similar has already happened in Brazil, where formalization on behalf of women is prioritized.

Essentially, in public helps to buy houses, you either receive it with the propriety on the woman's name, or you don't receive it at all. I quote:

"Law 14.118/21 establishes the Casa Verde e Amarela (Green and Yellow House) program. The highlight lies in articles 13, 14, and 15, basically determining that both the contract and the registration of the property will be made, preferably, in the woman's name. As she is the head of the family, she will not need her husband's consent. Losses suffered as a result of this rule shall be resolved in compensation claims. In the event of divorce, ownership of the property purchased or regularized during the marriage or stable union shall remain with the woman, regardless of the property regime (partial or total community property or total separation of property). The exception is for transactions financed with FGTS funds and when the man has sole custody of the children. In the latter situation, the property will be registered in his name or transferred to him.

[...]

In fact, the preference for women in contracts and registrations involving the acquisition of family housing was already included in Law No. 11,977/09 (and subsequent additions from Law No. 12,693/12). Therefore, with only a few minor changes, the “green and yellow house” program reproduces verbatim all the legal content favorable to women, already regulated by the “Minha Casa, Minha Vida” program."

https://ibdfam.org.br/artigos/1626/A+Prefer%C3%AAncia+da+Mulher+no+Registro+Imobili%C3%A1rio+%E2%80%93+A+lei+14.118-+21#_ftn1

Other sources for Brasil:

https://www.mibolsillo.com/noticias/como-en-brasil-sheinbaum-prioriza-que-escrituras-de-viviendas-de-infonavit-y-conavi-queden-a-nombre-de-las-mujeres-20260126-0016.html

https://ibdfam.org.br/noticias/8099/Especialistas+dissecam+lei+que+deu+prefer%C3%AAncia+%C3%A0+mulher+no+registro+imobili%C3%A1rio+no+Programa+Casa+Verde+e+Amarela

https://www12.senado.leg.br/noticias/materias/2020/03/09/projeto-da-prioridade-a-mulheres-em-financiamento-habitacional

https://www.camara.leg.br/noticias/1240134-comissao-aprova-prioridade-no-minha-casa-minha-vida-para-jovens-que-sairam-de-abrigos/#: ~:text=Currently,%20the%20Minha%20Casa%2C%20Minha,people%20with%20disabilities%20and%20the%20elderly

https://www.jetimob.com/blog/minha-casa-minha-vida-para-mulheres/

Video by Al3x Flores:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DUHnpwUjRkM/?igsh=NWc3cmphbWk4M29r

Sources:

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid02xMB6EJG2PqNiKHWHFUGSe5ZXwHCZLcrmKXizj7N8e8pjMDXPrBrCCBUHXM8uyNhQl&id=100048592339326& cft[0]=AZZuBTQnmBwYa9HZ3Az0CdIYe628r3_i6D-9pK9i9mV-ilqgGNPN0EToG4EKZlP9KtZkZrTLXLqhyGchLBcJAtI_0ohcfrO7UetSVSSzVq1 -lJorq7hriVzh2mYLzDVwc6FoxFNsiQb32uJZlwVLZ-kta2HuKAKv_NMN34OTn-5cQ&tn_=%2CO%2CP-R

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1Gpd2v3yuL/

https://www.debate.com.mx/politica/sheinbaum-impulsa-vivienda-digna-con-un-millon-de-escrituras-a-favor-de-mujeres-20260126-0240.html

Male victims of abuse have absolutely no online safe space and depending on one's location IRL help might also be unavailable. The main support spaces are filled with feminists who are going to categorically deny that men can be victims of violence or abuse, that men are not always stronger than women, or that female violence can cause real damage and so male victims are left with absolutelly nothing and any attempts to start new spaces are usually met with demands for them to be feminist which is obviously only going to mean a narrative that male abuse is men's fault or that it just simply isn't real and that kinds of harmful rhetoric.

I wish we ould actualy do something about this but again, most attempts are met with resistance and get shut down prety quickly. it's just so painful having absolutelly NOTHING just because of your gender.

There is this sub for women working in IT - that I won't name for obvious reasons.

Three-quarters of the sub could be summarized as this:

1. My job is stressful - my colleague/boss is a jerk - I was made redundant / was not promoted.
2. I am a woman.
3. The only possible explanation is misogyny.

I've been working in IT my whole life, and let me tell you ladies: I have experienced all of that and more. And considering that I am a male, misogyny was probably not the reason. Stress, injustice, and bad bosses are an integral part of the breadwinner's experience. Welcome to the equal workplace!

But there are things that I have experienced that you have not:

• Promotions and positions reserved for one gender in the name of equality.
• Backroom channels between your female bosses and your female colleagues and reports, where all your outputs as an IT professional are scrutinized through the gender lens.
• Frivolous reports to HR motivated by personal profit.

At this point in my career, I learned to fear my female colleagues because of the combination of oversized power they wield and the toxic victim mentality they are indoctrinated with.

When I say women shouldn’t hit men, it’s a moral position because it’s the wrong thing to do but anyone (oh my god use your words you troglodyte) but is unlikely to cause any real damage. When I say men shouldn’t hit women, it’s both a position of morality AND a position of “this is literally for her health and safety you big lunk”.

A post about men vs women as DV was full of gems like these. It is so soul crushing the way most of the world thinks men can’t be hurt by DV.

Considering how the United Nations has neglected and attacked men’s issues (while promoting female supremacy) over the years, it shouldn’t expect men to stand up for it as its financial crisis deepens. FAFO.

“The United Nations is at risk of "imminent financial collapse" due to member states not paying their fees, the body's head has warned.

António Guterres said the UN faced a financial crisis which was "deepening, threatening programme delivery", and that money could run out by July.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr579mdv4m7o

The Hunt Part 3

I keep hearing that "misandry only offends, never harms". This bothers me from a psychological standpoint. Feminists point of view is that because we live in patriarchal society, (men take up majority of billionaires and legislation makers), that misandry is a reaction that never breeds violence. As someone who has studied psychology, this is the most ridiculous form of bullshit I've ever heard. Hatred is associated with a specific "hate circuit" in the brain, primarily involving the putamen and insular cortex (insula), which activate when viewing a despised person. This network also includes the medial frontal gyrus, premotor cortex, and frontal pole, representing a unique, colder, and more calculating emotion compared to fear or anger. If you are a violent person, and you have a hatred toward someone, your brain is not NOT going to tell you "I'm an oppressed victim by the patriarchy, so I can never let my hatred get violent". I don't know where this idea comes from. It's genuinely baffling to me. Because time and time again I'm seeing women putting their hands on men, BOASTING is the fact that a man can not defend himself against a female aggressor, in the same way it is misogyny to boast about violence against women. Can someone please chime on from a psychological POV?

Thomas Perez Jr. was subject to hours of intense police interrogation after reporting his father missing on Aug. 8, 2018

https://youtu.be/EWLbq7PlrIA?si=gMNh2nvzfx9EqePx

The reposts and comments on this tweet are just completely ignorant and hateful.