Reddit is breaking the law

My thread regarding a banned user's clone was shut down yesterday—Sean Cook2 sent me a PM explaining why—but since I never received an answer to my other question, which I assume doesn't violate any site rules, I'm re-posting it here.

So—given those bold claims, shouldn't this post have at least earned a red card? If posts like this go unpunished, the outlet is essentially permitting gender discrimination—which could lead to legal action under Article 36 of the Equal Rights Amendment.

Media outlets that broadcast content—or run ads—portraying men or women in an offensive, belittling, or degrading way based on gender or sexual orientation will face fines for violations up to... $333333

.

A public official. said:I suppose I have to address this bolded section—especially that little smiley at the end. Beyond the implication that women are essentially confused creatures who can never quite decide what they actually want (one minute it’s all about being "emancipated," the next it’s "alpha males," then it shifts again)—this attempt at "witty" sarcasm actually hits the nail on the head. It perfectly captures the reality of what’s happening, and exactly what those feminist puppet masters are trying to pull by using their frustrated brigades on the ground.

The feminization of men—turning them into soft, submissive little things. Characterized by a lack of grit, drive, or backbone. Essentially, bodies that look male but possess a female psyche. It’s easy enough to see why these wet dreams of the feminist movement exist. They seem to realize that women will never quite match men in terms of physical, intellectual, or creative capacity—so their only move left is to try and drag men down to their level.Wouldn't that just turn them into competitors—thereby satisfying those inflated ambitions and that desperate craving for social status and prestige?

A certain subset of men—and I use that term loosely—actually managed to pull it off. These particular "men" are publicly hailed as being "emancipated" and "civilized," though privately, they’re met with nothing but mockery and disdain—dismissed as mere weaklings—while we just call them what they are: frauds.

Poor souls—tame, conditioned, and utterly neutered. Whether it’s driven by a fear of the ruling class, the media, the judiciary, or just general systemic pressure—or perhaps their own personal failings and... eccentricities—they don't just settle for less. They basically deny women any actual equality when it comes to capability—or even social standing—effectively rendering the Equal Rights Amendment a mere formality. Sometimes they actually ramble on about some kind of female "supremacy"—we can see plenty of examples of that right here in this thread. They seem perfectly fine with watching our once progressive and dominant culture devolve into a decadent peacockocracy, where men's rights are systematically eroded more and more every day. Honestly, some of these oddballs even go so far as to fantasize about living in such an unnatural, distorted world.

Fair enough. The feminist ambitions are clear—once we actually get to them. I can't seem to elevate women enough to match men in terms of skill or societal contribution—so I suppose my only option left is to handicap the men until they catch up to our level. Feminize them—train them to accept these vague stances and ever-growing, insatiable demands. Let them become like oxen; doing all the actual work while refusing any recognition or status—just blindly, predictably accepting their subordinate role in society as if it were perfectly natural.

So, what exactly are these feminist puppet masters—the architects behind all these "movements" and "ideologies" pulling the strings of feminist and "gender" upheavals—actually after? It’s quite obvious. The nature of a real man is such that he isn't easily manipulated; he tends to question imposed "authorities" and their dogmas, explores different paths, and has a certain rebellious streak. That makes him a terrible subject to rule over.

History shows us that men are the ones starting rebellions, driving revolutions, changing regimes, and toppling governments. Women's involvement in these things has been largely symbolic—and often not even that. By nature, women aren't typically inclined toward high-stakes risks, physical danger, or direct conflict with those in power. They generally tend to fit into existing systems, respect hierarchy, and don't feel the need to challenge "authority"—meaning they cause far fewer headaches for the ruling structures than men do.

That is why the goal is to turn men into "feminized pushovers." To make them just like women—obedient, compliant conformists and opportunists who won't give the people actually in charge any trouble.

History has proven that no regime can ever build a repressive apparatus large or efficient enough to keep people in submission forever. No matter how hard governments try to squeeze, they eventually fall.

So, they came up with a plan. Since men are the ones creating problems, rebelling, and tearing down leadership, they need to be neutralized. And the easiest way to do that is through emasculation. Men shouldn't be allowed to be men anymore; they have to become as much like women as possible. Basically, "softies." That way, they stop posing a threat to the ruling regimes and their masters.

But how do you immobilize, pacify, and feminize half the population? No one can build a police force or intelligence agency massive enough to handle a task that gargantuan. So, they had a bright idea: let's invent feminism and "gender ideology." Convince women that men are their enemies, that they are being oppressed, and that traditional masculine behavior and traits are a threat to women that must be fought. Get women to pull the wagons for the regime.

Let them hunt men down. Let them denounce and sue them for any behavior that could be labeled as "typically male." Imagine having one half of society—women—constantly monitoring, spying on, and reporting the other half. It's brilliant, really. And cheap. Just toss some funding at feminist organizations and "activists" to keep the fire stoked and recruit new waves of "self-aware" and "empowered" crusaders, and you've got a mass-scale, low-cost surveillance system for anyone who might threaten the status quo.

The police and secret services can't watch everyone 24/7. But a wife, a girlfriend, a coworker, a curious neighbor, or those eternally vigilant "civic activists" certainly can. Every man can effectively be under constant surveillance by someone, and any "masculine" behavior can be promptly detected, reported, and neutralized. There is no respite and no safe space. Everything and everyone is under scrutiny.

And you don't even need to be charged with anti-government activities. Why would a regime bother with such complicated legal constructions? An accusation of vague and fluid "sexual harassment" is plenty. The point is to ensure citizens—especially men—realize the regime can detect them at any moment, turn them into social pariahs, and neutralize them. If you dare to be disobedient, lift your head, or—heaven forbid—think for yourself.

Under this constant pressure and the watchful eye of the "fairer sex," men will supposedly find it easier to accept a subordinate role, gradually adapting and turning into softtons—or "pushovers." Accustomed to being quiet and compliant not just with women, but, crucially, with the authorities. Exactly the kind of people the regime wants. That is why feminism and "gender ideology" were invented, and why they are kept alive today.

Of course, a system like this is unsustainable in the long run—it's bound to collapse. But if men simply allow it—if they truly undergo a mass transformation into spineless pushovers—then perhaps such a society *deserves* to fail. It should make way for something healthier and more vital, built upon a natural division of roles and responsibilities. I'm talking about a society where social standing and prestige are earned through duty and merit, rather than dictated by gender or sexual orientation. A society free from "positive discrimination," quotas, or the ability to be shut down without evidence—just based on someone's word—leading to people being evicted from their homes or cut off from their own children. We are witnessing an increasing number of these violations against men's rights every single day.

Honestly, I’d love to just take this entire post and stick it in my signature...

It’s pretty funny to me—since when did it become standard practice for the administration to just nuking a thread and then decide to handle all the replies via private message instead?

Lately, they've been deleting threads like crazy.
A few have already vanished this week.
None of them were offensive or anything like that.
They shut down the 'administrative question' thread, claiming repeatedly that people could just start their own threads for questions and get answers.
But now they’re closing those too, and hiding whatever responses were actually given—assuming they even answered at all.

I don't see why Sean Cook2's response had to be such a state secret, or why we aren't allowed to see it.
To me, it seems pretty obvious that this public official used to be a bailiff, and is most likely a pillar of society.

Administration, look, he doesn't bother me. He can post on Reddit for a hundred years if he wants. Just don't treat us like fools.

hollowtrucker77 said:It’s pretty funny to me—since when did it become standard practice for the administration to just nuking a thread and then decide to handle all the replies via private message instead?

Apparently, it's against the rules to write, hold a debate, or start threads regarding who belongs to which clone on PKZ 🤣—that’s clearly why.

Take former moderator VeronikaV, for instance; she used to make things up and throw out false accusations. It seems the new administration is strictly forbidding that behavior now. And frankly, I’d say they're right to do so, given how easily those powers could be abused.🤷

@public official

a total bullseye right in the center...

A public official has been called out, yet his post—one among many that deserved it—remains untouched. The post directly beneath his, however, was swiftly slapped with a red card long ago. I can't quite wrap my head around the criteria being used here—some sort of fan club mentality, perhaps...🤷

Sean Cook2 said:A public official has been called out, yet his post—one among many that deserved it—remains untouched. The post directly beneath his, however, was swiftly slapped with a red card long ago. I can't quite wrap my head around the criteria being used here—some sort of fan club mentality, perhaps...🤷

Look, speaking as a former moderator, I can tell you firsthand that this "public official" type pops up in a different guise on Reddit every single time. It takes a little while to spot them, but once you do, you have to give credit where it’s due—it’s a lot of work to track them down. In the meantime, they manage to clutter up the feed with posts that are way too long to actually read. Every now and then, they’ll drop a genuinely sharp observation, like something about domestic politics, but they always try to sneak in these absolutely pathetic theories regarding gender, race, and nationality. Someone reports them, a mod steps in to issue a ban and scrubs the worst of it, but there’s always some leftover trash left behind.

I mean, look, I think my former colleagues have good intentions, really. But if you ask me, they’re basically playing a game of Sisyphus here—just pushing that same heavy boulder up the hill over and over again. Honestly, any attempt at more aggressive moderation than what we're doing now would probably just start looking like a simulated police investigation. It would definitely cause way more damage to the community than it would actually solve. Maybe it's overkill, but I guess that's just how it goes.

My honest recommendation? Just ignore the lists. 😁

It’s pretty obvious that we're still struggling to actually detect and penalize hate speech.

Take this, for example: when a philosopher like Sesardić writes that Black people are less intelligent than Caucasians, it gets published in a major evening news outlet without anyone blinking an eye. No one even mentions hate speech! And the guy keeps his prestigious university chair in China—though I suppose that's because he simultaneously argues that Asians are smarter than Caucasians 🤷.

On the flip side, when a woman writes a book titled "Why We Get Paid Less," tons of women buy it, and suddenly she ends up making more money than 80% of the men writing books.🤷

To me, it feels like hate speech is being allowed to slide at the expense of free speech. It seems there's a consensus that it's better to be accused of hate speech than to be accused of restricting free speech. I guess it's just way easier to define what hate speech is than it is to pin down the exact boundaries of free speech.

I've actually tried pointing out hate speech myself on certain topics. I've shared links and even translated definitions from English to make my point—but in the end, nothing ever happens. Everything just passes under the radar in the name of free speech.
As it stands, as long as it stays just talk, there isn't any visible damage. 😕

Ultimately, these kinds of outbursts should lead to disqualification. If you aren't handing out penalties or warnings, then you shouldn't even engage with these people. Don't try to argue or debate them; hate speech is completely immune to logic or any kind of argument. In my opinion, a sanction should happen if someone attacks an individual based on their gender, but if they're just making sweeping generalizations about all women, then it's clearly just barroom talk and shouldn't be taken seriously.

Michelle Wells3 said:Look, speaking as a former moderator, I can tell you firsthand that this "public official" type pops up in a different guise on Reddit every single time. It takes a little while to spot them, but once you do, you have to give credit where it’s due—it’s a lot of work to track them down. In the meantime, they manage to clutter up the feed with posts that are way too long to actually read. Every now and then, they’ll drop a genuinely sharp observation, like something about domestic politics, but they always try to sneak in these absolutely pathetic theories regarding gender, race, and nationality. Someone reports them, a mod steps in to issue a ban and scrubs the worst of it, but there’s always some leftover trash left behind.

I mean, look, I think my former colleagues have good intentions, really. But if you ask me, they’re basically playing a game of Sisyphus here—just pushing that same heavy boulder up the hill over and over again. Honestly, any attempt at more aggressive moderation than what we're doing now would probably just start looking like a simulated police investigation. It would definitely cause way more damage to the community than it would actually solve. Maybe it's overkill, but I guess that's just how it goes.

My honest recommendation? Just ignore the lists. 😁

I’d sooner say someone in this whole situation is just a massive idiot rather than Sisyphus... but hey, that’s just my two cents. 😁
Because at the end of the day, all those good intentions don't mean a damn thing. 🤷

Any moderation more aggressive than what we have now would basically turn into simulating police procedures, which would cause far more damage to the community than any benefit it provides.

What’s the actual point of these maniacs who wander from one corner of the internet to another trying to push their twisted indoctrinations?
And if you want the circus to get even bigger, I’ve frequently run into these types—people I used to recognize myself, actually—bragging about how they got banned from other sites. I mean, seriously, what is this? A social services center? A playground for the needy, the humiliated, and the rejected? 🤷

They should just go start their own specialized forum alongside this one and let people like that play together 24/7.
It’s a win-win.

My top recommendation: use the ignore list. 😁

The user isn't saying anything else. 🤷
But damn this administration for failing to see anything problematic in the absolute filth left behind after every single incarnation of this guy.

Michelle Wells3 said:Look, speaking as a former moderator, I can tell you firsthand that this "public official" type pops up in a different guise on Reddit every single time. It takes a little while to spot them, but once you do, you have to give credit where it’s due—it’s a lot of work to track them down. In the meantime, they manage to clutter up the feed with posts that are way too long to actually read. Every now and then, they’ll drop a genuinely sharp observation, like something about domestic politics, but they always try to sneak in these absolutely pathetic theories regarding gender, race, and nationality. Someone reports them, a mod steps in to issue a ban and scrubs the worst of it, but there’s always some leftover trash left behind.

I mean, look, I think my former colleagues have good intentions, really. But if you ask me, they’re basically playing a game of Sisyphus here—just pushing that same heavy boulder up the hill over and over again. Honestly, any attempt at more aggressive moderation than what we're doing now would probably just start looking like a simulated police investigation. It would definitely cause way more damage to the community than it would actually solve. Maybe it's overkill, but I guess that's just how it goes.

My honest recommendation? Just ignore the lists. 😁

Honestly, they aren't even that hard to spot—which makes it a bit frustrating that his posts still slip through on clearly moderated pages, allowing him to keep posting for days. I actually started this thread just to ask why nothing is being done about it.

Jerry Rogers6 said:I’d sooner say someone in this whole situation is just a massive idiot rather than Sisyphus... but hey, that’s just my two cents. 😁
Because at the end of the day, all those good intentions don't mean a damn thing. 🤷

Any moderation more aggressive than what we have now would basically turn into simulating police procedures, which would cause far more damage to the community than any benefit it provides.

What’s the actual point of these maniacs who wander from one corner of the internet to another trying to push their twisted indoctrinations?
And if you want the circus to get even bigger, I’ve frequently run into these types—people I used to recognize myself, actually—bragging about how they got banned from other sites. I mean, seriously, what is this? A social services center? A playground for the needy, the humiliated, and the rejected? 🤷

They should just go start their own specialized forum alongside this one and let people like that play together 24/7.
It’s a win-win.

My top recommendation: use the ignore list. 😁

The user isn't saying anything else. 🤷
But damn this administration for failing to see anything problematic in the absolute filth left behind after every single incarnation of this guy.

Exactly.

It’s impossible to miss what’s being written—even if you have them on ignore—when there's always a crowd of people ready to sign off on that garbage and cheer him on.

And now, suddenly, these self-proclaimed activists want everyone to shut up and just listen to their specific perspective and nothing else.
It’s funny how they go completely deaf and blind the second one of them starts glamorizing some 40-year-old predator dating a 13-year-old, or when another colleague decides to claim that men only land management roles because of what they’ve got in their pants.

Yeah, yeah... let's not derail this thread by bringing up topics that don't belong here.
The real issue is that you lot aren't even capable of fighting back with actual logic; instead, you just resort to insults, mockery, or mindless whining to try and prove you have any shred of competence, expertise, or objectivity left in you.

Sean Cook2 said:Honestly, they aren't even that hard to spot—which makes it a bit frustrating that his posts still slip through on clearly moderated pages, allowing him to keep posting for days. I actually started this thread just to ask why nothing is being done about it.

He’ll just claim it's all down to the administration—blaming their specific stance and the blatant fact that they’re clearly greenlighting the promotion of whatever values they personally deem "good" or acceptable.

And honestly, this is just another chapter in the same book—a continuation of the incredibly poor and incompetent administration I’ve been witnessing on this platform for years now.

Sean Cook2 said:Exactly.

It’s impossible to miss what’s being written—even if you have them on ignore—when there's always a crowd of people ready to sign off on that garbage and cheer him on.

And those signers—honestly, they’re clearly too close for comfort. It’s almost like there’s some secret romance going on behind the scenes. 😁😁

Sean Cook2 said:A public official has been called out, yet his post—one among many that deserved it—remains untouched. The post directly beneath his, however, was swiftly slapped with a red card long ago. I can't quite wrap my head around the criteria being used here—some sort of fan club mentality, perhaps...🤷

I still don't quite get why this post got flagged. 🤷

Alex Barnes8 said:I still don't quite get why this post got flagged. 🤷

Perhaps some technicality regarding the links—nothing too major.

Which ones didn't end up getting penalized elsewhere.

So, I’m asking again and looking for a straight answer—did that post at least warrant a red card? Moderators, admins?

Daniel Ward87 said:That user got permabanned, so deleting the post isn't going to change a thing. That kind of toxic energy isn't welcome anywhere on Reddit, and the mods were just doing their jobs. What's actually gained by scrubbing the post?

I get that nothing changes, but since his posts are still sitting in the Reddit archives, I thought having that red flag next to them might at least signal that this kind of rhetoric isn't tolerated.

Once the user was banned, my actual concern wasn't about the flagging—it was whether it's acceptable for posts like that to go unpunished in the first place.

That type of discourse isn't welcome anywhere on Reddit, and the moderators did their job.

The moderators could have been faster and more effective, but fine.