Request for clarification - Moderator Chuck

I guess if I’m being honest, not a single thread on this Reddit has actually managed to catch fire or truly come to life yet, which is kind of depressing if you think about it. TITLE I mean, I guess you have to wonder if it actually qualifies as systematic—you know, like, legally sanctioned or state-sponsored—discrimination, or if it’s just some other way of infringing on people's rights altogether... it's hard to say for sure, maybe. MENSo, I actually went ahead and did it—I opened that thread yesterday, mostly because you suggested I take on the role of moderator myself.

First off, here’s what I’m thinking:

I suppose there isn't much left to say, really, though I guess I could try to wrap my head around it if I had the energy, which I don't, so maybe I won't. It’s just one of those things where you look at the situation and realize that everything we thought we knew about how things work in this country might just be a bit of a stretch, or perhaps a complete fantasy, depending on how cynical you're feeling today—and personally, I’m feeling pretty cynical. I mean, when you sit back and actually weigh the implications of what's being discussed, it feels like we're circling a drain of our own making, though I'm probably just being overly dramatic, isn't that always the case? Anyway, it's all quite exhausting to think about.

Charles Fox10 said:I’ve already posted about this once, so I suppose I’ll just go ahead and do it again. It isn't like we’re intentionally splitting up threads because we have some sort of hidden agenda or anything; it's more that we only really merge them once they start becoming identical and basically overlapping one another.

I guess either silentridge3 or Bradley Scott2 can just go ahead and kick off a thread—let's call it a "men's topic" for lack of a better term, I suppose—and we won't have any issues at all.

I mean, I guess it actually makes a lot of sense that they’d be over on the Politics subreddit, especially since the whole point of that section is to host discussions about legislation and government affairs. You have the main Politics sub dedicated to the heavy hitters—the parties, the organizations, and the people running the show—while the "close to politics" side of things is really meant for everything else that touches upon our social fabric and daily lives. It feels like everyone should be treated with the same level of importance there, honestly; we should probably be looking at all these different facets of society through the same lens, though I suppose that's easier said than done in practice.

If none of the ladies feel like stepping up to start their own "women's thread," I guess I'll just go ahead and open one myself, probably just by copy-pasting some of the posts from this discussion.

I was thinking, if it’s alright with everyone, maybe we could try moving this to Sunday evenings? I guess since that's when most people finally have a bit of breathing room after the weekend, it might actually make sense to catch everyone while they're winding down.

If anything seems a bit fuzzy or unclear, I guess you could always just shoot me a private message.

We had this whole clear understanding that we’d handle things this way, you know, so that the specific issues men face within the system wouldn't just get buried or lost. I mean, if we don't keep them distinct, they're just going to end up swallowed up by some vague, sweeping title like "violence and discrimination," which, let's be honest, doesn't even mention men at all. It's just one of those things where if you don't draw a line, the actual point gets completely drowned out.

I guess I went ahead and suggested a title for the thread, anyway. He was complaining.And then you went and wrote this:

I guess I should probably start by saying that there isn't much left to unpack here, though I suppose if one really wanted to dig through the wreckage, they could try. It’s all just part of the same exhausting cycle, isn't it? Everything feels a bit stagnant, like we're just circling the same drain over and over again, and honestly, I’m not even sure if anyone actually expects anything to change at this point. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but it feels like we've been through this exact same loop more times than I can count, and yet, here we are, staring at the same old problems as if they were brand new. It’s almost funny, in a dark sort of way, how little progress actually gets made despite all the noise and the endless, pointless arguing that seems to define everything lately. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but it feels like we're all just waiting for a shift that's never actually going to come.

Charles Fox10 said:So, you're telling me you waited three days and then just decided to open a thread here on Reddit, and I guess, if that’s how you want to play it, fine—that’s all well and good for you—but if we really had three whole days to work with, maybe, just maybe, we could have used an extra day to actually hash things out and get on the same page regarding these topics first.

Honestly, it feels like absolutely nothing has changed around here. It’s kind of exhausting, really, because it seems like the only topics that actually get any traction or stay permitted are these weirdly vague threads where the opening post completely avoids the actual issue at hand, usually topped off with a title that has zero connection to the systematic financing of discrimination and demonization of men. I guess that's just how things work now, maybe.

Regarding your suggestion... I mean, looking at what you’re proposing for the moderation side of things, I guess there's a certain logic to it, though I can't say I'm entirely convinced just yet. It feels like one of those situations where you think you've found a perfect fix, but then you start wondering if you're just trading one headache for another, if that makes sense. Maybe I'm being too cynical, or maybe I've just seen this movie before, but I tend to hedge my bets when things seem this straightforward. It's a lot to chew on, really.

So, well, after that thread was shut down at lightning speed...

The latest sexist scheme involving those fake gender ombudsmen is honestly just exhausting.

I mean, let's be honest here—this is clearly a topic that is 100% close to politics, isn't it? I guess it’s just one of those things where you can't escape the political undertones no matter how hard you try.

...based on that line of reasoning:

I was scrolling through some old threads on Reddit the other day, just killing time, when I stumbled upon this massive discussion that really got me thinking about how much everything has shifted lately. It’s one of those deep dives where you start reading one comment and suddenly an hour has passed, and you realize you're knee-deep in a debate about how society handles sensitive issues. There was this one specific thread—it’s hard to even describe the vibe without sounding like a conspiracy theorist, I guess—but it really touched on how certain groups seem to be targeted by the way things are run now. It felt like people were arguing over whether we’re actually making progress or if we're just finding more sophisticated ways to alienate people. You know, that feeling where you wonder if the institutions meant to protect us are actually just spinning their wheels or, worse, heading in the opposite direction entirely. It made me reflect on how much noise there is online these days. Everyone has an opinion, and everyone is shouting, yet it feels like we’re further from any kind of consensus than ever before. Maybe it's just my cynical side talking, but I can't help but feel like the more we talk about justice and equality, the more we end up creating these intense divisions that just feed into more tension. It’s a bit exhausting, honestly, trying to parse out what's actual truth and what's just someone's heated take during a late-night browsing session.

...let me say this again:

I guess I should probably start by saying that I don't really have a strong opinion on this, or maybe I do, it's hard to tell sometimes when everything feels so incredibly repetitive, but looking at what was said... well, it's just more of the same, isn't it? It seems like we're constantly circling the same drain, wading through these endless debates that never actually lead anywhere substantial, though I suppose that's just how things work these days in America, I guess. Everything feels a bit exhausted, a bit worn thin, if that makes any sense, like we've already had this exact conversation a thousand times before on Reddit and yet here we are again, still talking, still searching for some kind of resolution that probably doesn't even exist in this messy reality we live in. Anyway, I'm just rambling now, I suppose.

Charles Fox10 said:Maybe silentridge3 or Bradley Scott2 could just go ahead and start a thread—let’s colloquially call it a "men’s topic"—and we won't have any issues.

...so, yesterday I actually started a thread titled:

Systematically financing discrimination and demonization of men in America

..and I kicked it off with these posts:

Post 1

Post 2

Post 3

I also wrote this:

rule :

silentridge3 said:Honestly, I'm asking everyone participating in this thread to please refrain from the usual back-and-forth between men and women, those endless sociological debates about gender differences, rehashing the past, and all that stuff. This isn't about that; it's about a significant, systemic, and political issue facing our society today.

This is the only form of discrimination that persists unchecked and unpunished right in the middle of the system. Not on the fringes, mind you, but directly within the institutions of the state.

Now, looking at things today, it seems like that thread doesn't even exist anymore; it's like the posts were just dumped onto page 100,000 of some "everything and anything" thread under the title "violence and discrimination forum link." So, I followed the agreement with the moderator, did exactly what was suggested, yet this thread with a "male-centric" title was wiped out almost instantly.

Some questions (for Charles Fox10):

Does an agreement actually mean anything?
Is it even allowed on this Reddit to have a thread regarding the threatened rights of men by the system (with a title specifically addressing the vulnerability of male rights)?

I suspect certain moderators probably think, "Oh, that silentridge3 guy opens the exact same thread every single day," or maybe they think he's opened a hundred of them already. But the reality is quite different from the impression that there are a hundred identical threads—to be honest, there isn't even one, because the moderators just rapidly delete them, lock them, or drown them in a thread with a neutral (non-male) name.

I see that over on the politics section, there's a perfectly fine thread where a tycoon like Warren Buffett is characterized as a criminal in both the title and the opening post. I just can't wrap my head around how questioning the work of fake gender Ombudsmen (political bodies) and mentioning chauvinism toward men is considered a bigger problem for this Reddit than (much harsher) bashing entrepreneurs... Buffett didn't go "crying out" on Reddit, but the Ombudsman did? And now, everything that might bother the Ombudsman gets cut, even if it's perfectly logical and well-argued?

Thanks in advance for the response.

I’m jumping on the bandwagon here—we seriously need a dedicated thread to talk about men's issues. And yeah, I'm talking about the blatant bias coming from equality offices and all those other institutions that claim to care about "equality" but clearly don't.
What happened to this Reddit?
It all started with that massive thread about whether men's rights were being stripped away—that one had huge engagement and some really solid discussions. But then, Volume 2 got slapped with a gender-neutral title immediately, and they kept tweaking it to be even more vague and neutral.
Any thread that actually mentions men's rights or how the public and various advocacy groups treat them gets shut down, deleted, or renamed... you name it.
Why are the mods and admins so desperate to kill these topics? Is it fear? Ignorance? Pure bias? Or something else entirely?

Give us some breathing room!

Sent via smoke signals fueled by... well, you know.

I'm inclined to agree with the sentiment here... This is far too significant an issue for us to simply look the other way and pretend it isn't happening.

I'm standing with silentridge3!

I don't follow all of his threads religiously, so I won't pretend to have a deep critique of recent events—especially when it comes to how specific people act. But honestly, this subject deserves its own serious discussion. Right now, it’s stuck in the "close to politics" section of Reddit, where things have become too vague and lost touch with what the original poster actually intended.

At first glance, I think the current thread can stay put since it’s already getting a bit stale. However, any new topics need to be much more specific and focused on actual political developments. Plus, the moderators really need to step up and clear out the inappropriate posts so we don't end up with the same mess we saw in past threads.

It honestly surprises me sometimes how many otherwise smart and well-rounded Redditors just don't get the issues facing fathers and men today. It seems like society is so hyper-focused on women's issues that they forget men have struggles too. It’s not an "either/or" situation. Hurting a woman doesn't justify hurting a man! We can only fix this flawed logic by constantly pointing out how nonsensical it is, which is exactly what silentridge3 and a few others are trying to do.

Let's not kid ourselves and pretend this isn't a big deal. We shouldn't wait until it hits home personally before realizing how serious this is. Online forums are one of the few places where we can actually make a difference when government institutions and other societal structures fail us. This is one of those cases.

Best, Anthony Garcia19

What should we call this? A massive misunderstanding, a delayed reaction, or something else entirely?

Before I go any further, I hope nobody has ever—and I sincerely hope they won't—ban opening a thread here dedicated to the issues men face in society, ranging from political shifts to social dynamics. I trust that's been settled.

silentridge3, you're right, but that agreement is over a month old now. We discussed it during the meeting and then directly in the thread, which is pretty unusual.

So, what actually happened? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. You and everyone else just kept posting in both threads—the one on family law policy and the one close to politics regarding "discrimination." I logically concluded that since there was no pushback, this approach was working fine.

The thread Proposal for the new family law - comments and feedback! will remain untouched. Even if traffic is light, family law affects all of us, so that thread stays exactly as it is.

As for the thread violence and discrimination , it has served as our primary space for discussing discrimination against both women and men. Logically, it still makes sense to keep it.

So, what’s the proposal to wrap this up?

Just a heads-up: if we move toward a thread exclusively for men, we won't tolerate blatant or subtle insults toward women, labeling every woman a feminist, or similar generalizations.

Men's rights and how they're being sidelined?
Maybe we could frame it as: being targeted by the feminist movement?
Or maybe: the struggle for men's rights in today's world?

Guga, why don't you kick things off with an intro post...

Actually, instead of starting a whole new thread, should we just rename the "gender discrimination" one?

Sent with smoke signals via p.... dim.

I’m jumping in here to say I’m fully on board. I support Guggenheim's request and his observations. ☕

Charles Fox10 said:How should we call this? A massive misunderstanding, a delayed reaction, or something else entirely??

Personally, I don't think there's any misunderstanding here.
The owner sets the general rules for what's allowed on the site, and that’s their right.
The users (and even the mods, ultimately) can either agree with those rules or face the consequences.

So let's not call it a misunderstanding. We all know it isn't.

Before I go further, no one has ever—and I hope they won't—banned opening a thread dedicated to discussing the issues men face in society, ranging from political to social relations. I'm hoping this has been settled now.

Charles Fox10, you know as well as I do that isn't true. If you weren't a mod, you'd probably admit it yourself, just like I would have to defend the site if I were in your shoes.
But if I were trying to defend the site, I'd probably say something like, 'The truth is that there have been some moves recently that many users felt were unfair, and yes, threads have been moved, closed, or merged even when they didn't really warrant it, and moderation has been inconsistent at times...'
That's how a good PR expert would handle it, attempting to convince the users they're being sincere.
In reality, that's an extremely mild way to describe how these human rights threads have been handled on this site. And I'm not saying this site treats them poorly—it's just that elsewhere, it's often much worse.

silentridge3, you're right, but that agreement was made over a month ago, and we discussed it directly on the thread, which is pretty unusual.

And what happened? Absolutely nothing. You and everyone else just kept posting in both threads—the one about family law policy and the one regarding "discrimination." It seemed logical to me that since there was zero reaction, the current setup was working fine.

Charles Fox10, the politics section can handle three or four threads from this category.
For example, I started a thread once about the systematic manipulation involved in domestic violence research. That topic stays relevant and should actually be a top thread in politics, because every week we hear a new lie about it, and those lies are exactly what fuel the systematic discrimination against men.
But you quickly moved it, along with silentridge3's threads and others, into that vague "gender discrimination" bucket.

The thread Proposal for the new Family Law - comments and feedback! is staying put and won't be touched. Even though it doesn't get huge traffic, family law affects all of us, so that thread remains as it is.

This thread on Reddit is basically just a smokescreen—it’s a way to push the actual issues we want to discuss off the main political stage!
I already explained why a few months back.
Any changes to family law are completely meaningless if the underlying rules stay the same, where any father can be branded a criminal and thrown in jail based on a single phone call from a mother.
If I'm wrong, the Ombudsman's recent speech at the police academy proves my point; she was essentially calling for even more drastic measures specifically targeting men under the guise of a "gender-sensitive approach."
But we aren't allowed to make a big deal out of this unconstitutional behavior on the front page.

rule : Quote

So, what's the proposal here to finally get this done?

I don't know, Chuck.
Honestly.
I think you're still undecided on that yourself.

We'll just keep posting here as much as the site allows us, until some serious manosphere-focused organization or forum gets established here in the States. We can track the growth of those forums, organizations, and even political parties globally on a weekly basis. These topics will keep coming back, especially given the extreme rise in systemic discrimination against men.
And this platform will forever be branded as a media outlet that boycotted the fight for men's human rights—because the archives never lie.
The subculture of new generations of men raised on manosphere principles is going to become a massive new consumer demographic—a dominant group for advertising and everything else. It's already happening in places like Japan.
Whoever owns this media outlet really ought to consider these facts.

Seriously, why do you keep starting these endless threads about how men are being victimized. 🤣
@silentridge3/">@@silentridge3 Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem mostly triggered by the fact that women are getting recognized in science and that there are specific awards for female researchers. 😁 (you’ve actually started a thread about that before, too)
You're basically the only one bringing this stuff up, which honestly makes it look like you just can't stand women.☕

rule :

silentridge3 said:...so yesterday I went ahead and opened up a thread titled:

Systematically financing discrimination and demonization of men in America

..and I kicked it all off with these specific posts:

Post 1

Post 2

Post 3

So, basically, just open the thread for me with that exact title and those three opening posts.

I guess I should clarify that I’m really not interested in getting bogged down by insults directed at women, nor am I looking for endless historical or sociological debates, I suppose. What I’m actually after is a strictly focused discussion—one that centers on the political dimension of the issue, the actual system, and the hard facts. And, if I may be so bold, I’d really appreciate it if the moderators would focus on penalizing the people causing the trouble rather than punishing the victims.

I guess I should probably start by saying that I don't really have a dog in this fight, but looking at how things are unfolding, it feels like we're just circling the drain of some inevitable social collapse, doesn't it? Maybe I'm being too cynical, maybe that's just the weight of living in this era, but there's something about the way people talk now—especially on places like Reddit—that just feels so incredibly hollow and performative. It’s like everyone is playing a role in a play they didn't write, and I can't help but wonder if anyone actually remembers what it was like when discourse wasn't just a series of choreographed outbursts. Anyway, I digress. What were we actually discussing before I went off on that tangent?

granitefalcon26 said:Honestly, I can't help but wonder why we keep opening yet another thread about this whole supposed "men are being victimized" thing. It feels like we're just circling the drain with these topics lately. 🤣

I mean, this whole idea of those so-called "100 topics" is honestly just a myth at this point. It’s never actually existed, really; there were just some attempts made, I guess, but nothing ever truly took flight. To be fair, the moderators haven't actually let a single one through—not even once—whether you look at the titles or the actual subject matter being discussed.

granitefalcon26 said:I mean, you’re basically the only one around here who ever kicks off threads like this, so if I didn't know better, I'd probably start thinking you actually have some kind of deep-seated issue with women, or at least that you don't particularly care for them.☕

I mean, honestly, these topics just seem way too heavy and intense for such petty, low-level provocations, I guess. It feels like we're using sledgehammers to crack nuts, if that makes any sense, which is probably just a waste of everyone's energy.

This whole thread isn't actually about some obsession with women—honestly, she doesn't even mention them much—it’s more about questioning a system that is quite clearly violating the human rights of one specific gender, namely men. When I say it's clear, I mean it's right there in the paperwork, documented and undeniable. I think I've laid out a massive amount of facts to back that up, but I guess it just goes to show how deep the issues run.

For what it's worth—I actually really like women. I mean, most of the people I hang out with on a daily basis are women, so I guess you could say they make up my inner circle.

Are we actually going to discuss how to improve the quality of this debate, or just... what?

I’m waiting for an actual idea. I have no interest in arguing until the end of time.

Bradley Scott2, it isn't particularly pleasant when you claim I'm lying about my experience. No one has ever barred me from discussing topics via PDF. It's not like I suddenly became an expert on political discourse overnight.

rule :

Charles Fox10 said:Should we figure out how to handle this topic better just to keep the discussion quality up, or... what?

Bradley Scott2, it’s not really cool of you to tell me how to....

Sorry, but I honestly don't know how to write anything anymore without getting banned, even though I'm genuinely trying to have a constructive conversation.
So, I think I'll just stay quiet for now.
☕

rule :

Bradley Scott2 said:I’m sorry, but I honestly don't know how to write anything anymore—despite my best efforts to stay constructive—without getting banned.
So, I'll just keep quiet.
☕

Stop with the labeling and you'll be fine.

rule : Quote

Charles Fox10 said:Are we actually going to debate what would make for a better discussion here, or are we just... circling the drain?

Personally, I’m sitting here waiting for an actual idea instead of just bickering until the sun goes down.

Look, we can talk about "discussion quality" all day if you want. But if we're talking about moderator activity to actually improve things—which would lead to much better conversations much faster—it shouldn't be about locking threads. It should be about penalizing the people who are out there insulting others or trolling. You just need to punish the posts and remove them, leaving the thread free to focus on the political side of things, like specific actions, laws, and how they're being implemented.

But honestly, let's not get distracted by debating "how to raise the quality of discussion" when there is a far more pressing issue at hand:

Will you allow me to start a single thread that features a title clearly addressing the problems facing MEN in modern America, along with some introductory posts describing those issues?

I'll say it again:

rule : Quote

Charles Fox10 said:Either silentridge3 or Bradley Scott2 can go ahead and start a thread—let's call it a "men's topic" for short—and I won't have any problem with it.

So, will that actually happen? Will it be permitted?

It seems kind of pointless for me to take you up on that offer and open a thread only to have you moderators immediately lock it, move it, rename it, or do something else similar to shut it down.

What I am asking for here is explicit permission for a specific title and introduction:

rule : Quote

silentridge3 said:title: systematically financing discrimination and demonization of men in America

INTRODUCTORY POSTS:


Post 1

Post 2

Post 3

Thanks in advance for a straight answer.

Systematically financing discrimination and demonization of men in America

Title ???????

It won't work. The premise itself is malicious because of this "demonization" angle—personally, I don't feel that way at all. Try something more appropriate and start the thread over on the Politics subreddit.

I'm not going to manufacture posts just to fit a topic. Put in the effort yourself. If I understood correctly, this thread should focus strictly on the political dimension of legislative frameworks.

The basic guidelines are: no trolling, no insults, and no spamming. If someone posts something inappropriate, report it and ignore it. I'll emphasize: ignore it, and one of us will step in. If you don't ignore it and instead engage in a back-and-forth, don't complain when you get banned.

The rules for Politics are available here and based on experience, I’d draw attention to this specific part of the Rules:

Civilized discussion, respectful behavior, equality among participants, tolerance, fairness, community spirit, efficient debate, respect for individuals, and listening to all sides' arguments are the core values of the Politics subreddit.

As for me, here you go.

Edit: Suggested title... the status of men in a political and legislative sense?

Charles Fox10 said:Title ???????

It just doesn’t work, I guess, because the whole thing feels inherently malicious from the jump with this constant demonization of men, and honestly, I don't feel that way at all. Maybe you could try coming up with something a bit more appropriate and just start a new thread over on the politics subreddit instead.

I mean, how are you even supposed to feel when you’re being bombarded every single day by government-funded agencies and various NGOs, all of them pushing these totally skewed statistics that basically paint you as some kind of monster—just simply because you happen to be a man? I guess the title of this whole thing doesn't even really matter much in the grand scheme of things. Maybe it doesn't bother you, and honestly, who am I to judge? Maybe you actually *are* a violent guy, who knows? But personally, it gets under my skin. Though, I suppose it almost doesn't even matter how much it bugs me or you specifically; what matters is that we're looking at a case of systematic propaganda that is being actively funded to essentially demonize an entire gender. It isn't just some "personal opinion" floating around out there; it's a documented fact.

It’s honestly such a toss-up trying to figure out what qualifies as "evil" and what doesn't, isn't it? It's all so subjective, I guess. Like, if you look at certain political subreddits, you'll see thread titles that seem perfectly normal on the surface, yet they carry this underlying weight... For example:

I guess I should probably start by saying that there isn't much left to say about this whole mess, but here we are again, staring at the same old patterns and wondering why nothing ever actually changes, though deep down, maybe we already know the answer. It feels like we’re just circling the drain of the same tired arguments, drifting through these endless discussions on Reddit where everyone seems to have an opinion but nobody actually wants to deal with the messy reality of how things function, which is honestly pretty exhausting if you think about it too long. There's this sense of being stuck in a loop, where the discourse just keeps spinning around without any real momentum, and I can't help but feel a bit cynical about whether any of this matters in the grand scheme of things, but then again, maybe I'm just being overly pessimistic about the whole situation.

Allowed titles on the politics subreddit The user said:Is another massive shakeup on the horizon, or are we just staring down the barrel of a second pension pillar heist? I mean, I guess it’s worth asking whether they’re actually planning to raid our retirement savings all over again. It feels like every time things start to settle, some new scheme crawls out of the woodwork to redistribute what little we've managed to scrape together. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but I can't help feeling like we're just waiting for the next big grab.
The education gap between Americans and the Romani community... I don't know, I guess there’s just so much nuance there that people tend to ignore when they start shouting about it on social media. It feels like we always jump straight to the most extreme conclusions without really digging into the systemic stuff, though maybe I'm being too cynical. It's one of those things where you look at the data and it seems straightforward, but then you realize how much history and cultural friction plays into why certain groups end up struggling more in the school system than others. I suppose it’s easy to point fingers, but it’s probably way more complicated than any single headline makes it out to be.
It feels like we’re just watching it happen in real time—the government is actually footing the bill for a quiz show that is, quite frankly, unconstitutional in how it discriminates against people. I guess it’s just one of those things where you look at the news and think, "Wait, are they really doing this?" It seems like such a blatant disregard for basic principles, but maybe that's just the direction things are heading lately. It's all getting a bit much, isn't it?
It feels like these predatory clans, operating with that same old-school North American-style greed, are making a massive, coordinated charge against Mirna’s factory.
I honestly find myself wondering just how much longer Americans are going to sit around and take this constant political prostitution from our government—it’s like they’re just shamelessly selling us out, taking everything from the working class and handing it over on a silver platter to the ultra-wealthy.
I can't help but wonder how much longer this cannibalistic brand of neoliberalism is going to keep trampling over the working-class folks in public service while essentially tearing the very fabric of the State apart. It feels like we're just watching a slow-motion demolition, I guess.
THE BIGGEST AMERICAN SCAM: A paramilitary-style squad of cronies swindled away 660 houses and apartments
I mean, I guess you could argue that America is slowly morphing into some kind of totalitarian state, driven by this constant wave of media censorship and the complete erosion of press freedom, though maybe that’s just my cynical take on how things are sliding sideways lately.
... ‎

On Reddit, in the sections that are close to politics, you see all sorts of titles like this popping up:

I guess I should probably start by saying that I don't really have a strong opinion on this specific point, though I suppose I could be persuaded otherwise if more evidence came to light, but anyway...

The permitted titles over on the "close to politics" subreddit. As if I haven't heard this all before... someone says: I mean, I don't know, maybe it’s just my cynical way of looking at things, but you can't help but feel like there's this whole underlying layer of influence involving the Zadar mafia and that Hypograd crowd, which honestly makes me wonder if anyone is actually calling the shots anymore... or if it's all just one big, messy web of connections that we're all expected to ignore. Joe Mraović—the man’s basically the Reagan of his region—is an actual hero, you know? He isn't one of those spineless types who just folds under pressure or plays the coward, which I guess is more common than people care to admit these days. The media’s coordinated criminal scheme... So, I guess we’re looking at Džakula—who used to be the big shot leader out in the countryside—now trying to take on the entire country without even having any weapons to his name. It feels like one of those situations where someone loses their leverage and decides to just start shouting at the wind, though I suppose that’s just how things tend to play out sometimes, isn't it? Maybe he thinks he can still make an impact through sheer noise alone, but honestly, it all seems a bit desperate to me. I guess it’s worth looking back at how our neighbors acted during the Homeland War versus what they’re up to nowadays, though I suppose it’s all a bit complicated when you start digging into the details. It makes you wonder, really, where all that energy went, or if it just shifted into different, perhaps more subtle, channels over the years. I guess I have to ask—are we Americans just a nation of small souls? It’s just one big, hypocritical mess, isn't it? I guess we all see it, though maybe some people prefer to look the other way just to keep their own peace of mind. It feels like everyone is performing for an audience that doesn't even exist, pretending to hold certain values while acting in total opposition to them the second they think nobody is watching. It’s exhausting, really, watching the constant pretense. The whole "law and order" rhetoric feels like such a blatant, low-effort setup aimed right at naive citizens who are already being systematically stripped bare by the powers that be. I mean, if you look closely, it’s all just a clever little facade designed to distract people while their pockets are being picked by the state, and I guess it's almost impressive how they pull it off, though it's pretty exhausting to watch. It’s this subtle way of framing control as something beneficial, when in reality, it seems more like a calculated move to keep everyone compliant while the actual looting happens behind the scenes. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but it feels like a massive sleight of hand meant to pacify a population that's already been bled dry. I can't help but wonder if the Government is actually planning to dip their hands into our second-pillar retirement savings. It’s one of those things that just keeps gnawing at the back of my mind, you know? I mean, looking at how things tend to go lately, I guess it wouldn't be the first time they've looked at people's hard-earned nest eggs as just another pot of money to shuffle around for their own ends. Maybe I'm being too cynical, or maybe I'm just being realistic about how these political maneuvers usually play out, but there's this lingering sense of uncertainty that makes it hard to feel truly secure about where that money is actually going. It's all a bit unsettling, really. ... ‎

I honestly find myself wondering about this intense, almost surgical level of subtlety being demanded when it comes to picking a thread title—especially for a topic that deals with such blatant discrimination against men within the American system. It’s quite a thing, really, seeing how incredibly "thin-skinned" and hypersensitive the moderators seem to be regarding a headline like that. I mean, if you just take a quick look at these other titles I’ve listed here—titles that actually made the cut without any fuss—it makes you think. I guess I have to ask:

Do you ever get that feeling, I don't know, like you actually belong to something? Or maybe it’s just me being overly cynical, but sometimes I wonder if anyone truly feels like they’re part of the fabric of this country anymore. It’s a strange thing to ponder, I guess, sitting here thinking about identity and where we all fit in the grand scheme of things. Maybe it’s just an existential crisis hitting me out of nowhere, but the whole concept of belonging feels increasingly complicated these days. Just a nation of small souls, I guess.Is the US government actually... It’s all just one big, sweeping robbery, isn't it? Honestly, I guess if you look closely enough at how things are running lately, it starts to feel like nothing more than a massive, organized heist. It’s exhausting, really, watching the whole thing unfold, but maybe that’s just the way the world turns now. I mean, what happens if they actually start aiming for the second pillar of the Social Security system? I guess the US government is really starting to... well, you know. It feels like every time we turn around, there’s another shift in how things are handled, and honestly, it makes me wonder where the floor is. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but it feels like we're just watching the pieces move on a board we didn't even realize we were playing on. It feels like everything is just spreading out endlessly, stretching thin across the horizon like some sort of vast, overwhelming expanse that refuses to settle down. I guess you could say it’s all just sprawling out in every direction at once, becoming this massive, unmanageable stretch of nothingness that somehow manages to take up even more space than it actually occupies, if that makes any sense. Maybe it's just the way things tend to drift lately, stretching further and further until the original shape is lost entirely.title ? Are we actually living in... I guess you could call it some kind of cannibalistic neoliberalism, if that even makes sense—though I suppose it does when you look at how everything just seems to feed on itself these days. It’s like this endless, self-consuming cycle where the system doesn't just exploit resources, but actually devours its own foundations just to keep the engine humming for one more day, which feels pretty grim when you really sit down and think about it.Is America actually... It honestly feels like we’re living under some kind of totalitarian state where media freedom has just gone out the window entirely. I don't know, maybe I'm just being cynical, but it seems like every time you turn around, there's another layer of control being wrapped around what we're allowed to see or say. It’s all becoming so heavy, this constant sense that the information landscape is being curated by forces that aren't exactly interested in the truth, and I guess it makes you wonder if genuine expression is even possible anymore in this climate....Wait, do you actually feel like Hypograd is really... what was I saying? I guess I’m just wondering if anyone else gets that same sinking sensation about the whole thing. It’s hard to say, really. Maybe I'm just being cynical, but sometimes it feels like we're all just circling the same drain, watching things unfold without much power to change the trajectory. I don't know. It's a lot to process, I suppose. It’s all just one big, interconnected web of organized crime, isn't it? I mean, you look at how certain groups operate, and it honestly feels like we're dealing with nothing more than a local mafia running the show behind the scenes. It’s that same old pattern where power and influence are just traded around in backrooms, and frankly, it makes you wonder if anyone is actually calling the shots or if it's all just a choreographed dance by these shadowy figures. I guess it doesn't really matter who's pulling the strings when the outcome always seems to favor the same few players, though maybe I'm being a bit too cynical about the whole thing. Still, it’s hard not to see the fingerprints of corruption everywhere you look lately.title ??????? Is establishing order actually something you can even define, or is it just a concept we cling to when things start feeling too chaotic? I guess it’s one of those questions that sounds simple on the surface but starts to feel incredibly heavy once you really sit with it for a second. Maybe it's about structure, or maybe it's just a way to soothe our own anxieties when the world feels like it's spinning a bit too fast. I don't know, I suppose there's no single right answer, which is probably why people argue about it so much. It feels like such a cheap, low-effort setup, honestly. Just one of those transparent little jabs that isn't even clever enough to be insulting, if that makes any sense. It’s just... beneath the belt, I guess.?...

I’m not even bringing this up to pick a fight over specific headlines or whatever, I guess, but more to point out this weird double standard I'm seeing. It seems like the moderators think it’s perfectly fine to label the government as a bunch of looters if they try to dip into a different pension fund, which, okay, fair enough, maybe, but then suddenly it becomes off-limits to call that very same administration chauvinistic when they use their laws, their agencies, and taxpayer money to directly and systematically finance discrimination and the demonization of men. It's just one of those things where you wonder how the rules work, you know?

I can't help but wonder why there’s such an intense wave of moderator panic surrounding this specific thread. It feels like everyone is walking on eggshells, doesn't it? I mean, why does the title of this particular discussion have to be absolutely flawless, while every other thread on the board is allowed to be a complete mess? It’s a bit strange, I guess, if you think about it.

I suppose I should start by saying that there isn't much left to discuss here, though I feel compelled to weigh in anyway because, well, here we are. It feels like we’ve been circling the same drain for a while now, hasn't it? I guess what I'm trying to get at—and maybe I'm just being overly cynical, which is my default setting at this point—is that the whole conversation seems to be drifting further away from any kind of actual substance. It’s all just noise, really. Just a lot of people shouting into the void on Reddit, hoping someone actually listens, even if most of it is just repetitive nonsense. I don't know, maybe I'm just tired of seeing the same arguments pop up every single week without any real evolution in how we think about these things. It’s exhausting, honestly.

Charles Fox10 said:I don't really feel like organizing my posts by specific topics, I guess, because I’d rather just put in the effort myself, though if I've managed to grasp the core idea correctly, this whole discussion should be focusing strictly on the political dimension of the legislative frameworks.

I mean, honestly, I feel like her whole focus should really be on anything involving the system and politics that touches upon the discrimination of men. It’s just... I don't know, maybe there's a better way to look at it, but she ought to be tackling all those systemic issues where the political machine and the legal framework actually intersect with how men are being treated.

I guess it’s just your specific desire as moderators to force everything into one single thread rather than letting us start separate ones, isn't it? It all ties back to the legal side of things, too—you know, the way we see people getting away with violating gender equality laws when it’s actually men’s rights being trampled on. There's this very obvious, blatant bias in how federal agencies like the EEOC or the Ombudsman operate under the guise of "gender equality," not to mention the massive amounts of taxpayer money being funneled into various NGOs that basically just run gender-biased propaganda campaigns. Then you have politicians getting public backing for these openly sexist stunts that only focus on violence against one specific group while ignoring everything else. It feels like a systemic effort, I suppose.

I guess you could open a hundred different threads if you really wanted to, but since you moderators insisted on keeping everything squeezed into just one single topic, well, you can't exactly complain when things spiral out of control. You can't demand that the whole conversation stays strictly about legalities and nothing else when you've already bottlenecked the entire discussion into one tiny space. It’s just how it works, I suppose.

By the way, you really have to try to wrap your head around the fact that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is a political entity—just like any other federal agency, a cabinet department, the White House, or the administration at large. It isn't some private non-profit or a local grassroots NGO. And because it functions as a political body, I guess it follows that it can, and frankly it should, be scrutinized from a political standpoint. That’s just how things work, I suppose. politics It’s honestly just like those ridiculous incentives coming out of the Department of Agriculture, or those endless, empty statements you hear from the Deputy Secretary of Culture. It’s all very much the same thing, I guess.

I guess I should probably start by saying that there isn't much to go on here, since the quote itself is just... well, it's empty. It’s a blank slate, really. Maybe that's a metaphor for the whole situation, though I suspect it's just a technical glitch or someone forgot to hit paste, which, honestly, feels pretty fitting given how things usually go. It’s like staring into a void and expecting a deep philosophical revelation to pop out, but instead, you just get nothing. Nothing at all. I suppose we could sit here and debate what the silence implies—is it a commentary on the lack of discourse, or just a simple mistake?—but I don't know, maybe I'm overthinking it. It’s hard to have a conversation when one side hasn't actually said anything, right? Still, I'll be here, waiting for whenever the actual substance decides to show up.

Charles Fox10 said:Title: My little thought experiment... what’s actually happening to the status of men within our political system and legal framework?

I mean, what are we actually going to do about all this taxpayer money being funneled into these women’s advocacy groups that seem more interested in pushing a specific gender bias than anything else? It’s getting a bit much, I guess. And then you have those politicians out there making these sweeping claims—claims that, if you actually look at the data, turn out to be nothing more than blatant falsehoods—about things like the "wage gap" or how some woman is being assaulted every few minutes in America. It’s exhausting, really. I don't think you can just tuck all of this under the umbrella of "legislation," because it feels like something much bigger is happening here; it's more about the broader landscape of political maneuvering and a systemic framework that was essentially built to facilitate that kind of rhetoric.

silentridge3, you’re exhausting me. I’ve lost all interest in reading your endless cycle of who, what, why, and how. Just start a thread, give it a title, and get on with it. I really couldn't care less.

I’ve spent two months entertaining this back-and-forth, yet you’re still stuck in a loop of questions and searching for answers.

The lack of a title... and this obsession with being subtle about it. It's frustrating. If you can't accept that, well, that’s your problem.

Honestly, do you even hear yourself when you write this?
rule :

Then you can't demand that it stays "strictly about the laws."

and your previous post
rule :

Posts should simply be penalized and removed, leaving the thread strictly for the political dimension—actions, legislation, enforcement, etc.

And then there's this from a few days ago:
rule :

I don't deal in insults toward women, nor do I want historical or sociological debates. I want a focused thread, centered on the political side of things—the system and the facts. I ask that moderators penalize the offenders, not the victims.

As far as I'm concerned, this debate is over. The thread can be opened, but how it develops and how it gets moderated will depend entirely on those first few posts that set the tone.

silentridge3... you might actually be the aggressor here. Please, just dial back the Ad Hominem attacks.

Charles Fox10 said:I’ve been going back and forth with you about this for two months now, and you're still stuck asking questions and hunting for answers.

Yeah. I am still full of questions.

The thing is, you guys haven't actually let me start this men's topic yet (which is what you called it, by the way, when you invited us to dive in). Every time I tried to get something going, it just got nuked—deleted, moved around, or whatever else happens here.

So, I guess it's a little weird that I have questions, right?

I just want to get everything squared away ahead of time—even the title—so I can be reasonably sure you aren't going to delete it, move it, or rename it the second I post. I mean, I realize it's probably a massive headache for the mods to wait for that annoying silentridge3 "in ambush," letting him struggle through opening a thread and carefully building his case, only to pull the rug out from under him by deleting or moving it. But honestly, I don't really feel like putting in all that effort just to end up looking like a complete idiot. I'd rather just know where I stand upfront.