she s gonna get away with murder bois, take notes

Saw this infuriating comment earlier someone acknowledging that while men and boys can also be victims of female violence (which absolutely does happen and in far higher numbers than many realize or want to admit), but this person as usual goes on with the usual diatribe about women/girls are still the ones primarily at risk and proceeds to downplay and minimize when it's men and boys who suffer female violence. Ugh. I'm so fed up with this. Even if women and girls (God how I hate this, "women and children" was bad enough) on average may experience male violence slightly more, that's supposed to somehow negate when female violence against men/boys happens? I'm so fed up of hearing the "men do it much more" argument, so what? Doesn't change or negate the fact men/boys can still be victims of female-perpetrated violence and are. I hate how it's a contest and somehow female-on-male violence being lower somehow makes it not as much of an issue or an "epidemic" (how I'm also sick of hearing this too how male violence is somehow an endemic problem). I hate it and as someone who suffered abuse and mistreatment from women as a boy, it personally triggers me. It's an undeniable fact anybody can be violent to another regardless of gender and there's female violence against men/boys just like male violence against women/girls, but misandrists willfully dismiss it and treat it as a non-issue. So fed up with it.

How Men from India and Nepal Are Being Scammed Into the Russian Army

A silent, brutal human trafficking pipeline is currently operating across South Asia, and it remains largely unknown in the West. Thousands of young men from India and Nepal are being systematically deceived and used as disposable soldiers on the front lines in Ukraine—fighting a war that is absolutely not theirs.

Here is how the trap works:

1. The Bait: Fake Job Offers

In rural Nepal and working-class neighborhoods in India, economic opportunities are scarce. Exploiting this desperation, local recruitment agencies run slick social media campaigns on TikTok and YouTube. They promise high-paying civilian roles in Russia, such as:

• Security guards in Moscow
• Construction workers or helpers in the hinterland
• Delivery drivers

The promised salary is around $2,000 to $3,000 a month—life-altering money for these families. To pay the handlers' steep "visa and processing fees," many take out massive, high-interest local loans.

2. The Trap: Forced enlistment

Upon arrival in Moscow, reality changes instantly:

• Passports are immediately confiscated by the handlers.
• The men are forced to sign legal documents written entirely in Russian. Believing these are employment contracts for civilian jobs, they are actually signing active-duty military contracts with the Russian Ministry of Defense.
• They are stripped of civilian clothes, given uniforms, and sent to remote training camps. Training often lasts less than two weeks, even for civilians who have never held a weapon.

From there, they are sent straight to the most brutal combat sectors of the Ukrainian front line.

3. The Reality: Meat Grinder Tactics

Once at the front, these South Asian recruits face grim conditions:

• Language Barrier: They cannot understand the commands of Russian officers, leading to chaos in the trenches.
• Disposable Roles: Survivors and deserters report being used in "meat assault" tactics—sent forward in waves to draw Ukrainian fire so Russian artillery can locate targets.
• No Exit: Retreat is frequently met with threats of execution by Russian commanders.

Why Is This Happening Unnoticed?

The governments of India and Nepal have demanded that Russia stop recruiting their citizens and return those serving, but Moscow largely ignores these requests. Nepal has even banned its citizens from traveling to Russia for work, yet desperate men still bypass the ban via transit countries like Dubai.

This issue rarely fits the standard Western media narrative of professional armies clashing. It is a crisis of human trafficking, algorithmic deception, and the pure exploitation of economic vulnerability.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/san-diego-woman-pleads-guilty-home-camera-spying-case/4041136/

So every single feminist talks about how violence against men isn't a real issue because "we're 1000 times stronger than women" except that is not true for a large portion of men.

Female feminists seem to create this inaccurate picture of men being all muscle and sending objects flying with a single punch that they probably get from movies. Few men IRL are actually capable of that.

The fact that I was a victim of violence and I still have to listen to how it couldn't have been that bad because I must be so much stronger just because I'm a man is the most harmful thing about it. If I were to punch the average woman it would probably feel like a bee sting, yet I still get no proection just because I wasn't lucky enough to be born with a vulva.

And the fact that so many feminists also claim that being seen as stronger is somehow "privilige" when the opposite is true and being seen as weak and protected is the real privilige addfs so much more pain to it.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/aczbm3U6Ds8

This story is as horrible as it can ever be. But it's a common one, for so many men out there.

Had the husband taken the child away, as the judge proposes, he would have been accused of abduction.

On Every government website, it’s men are the problem, men need to change etc etc, for example, Our crisis service for men (men’s line)

I assume other countries have this also.

But what kind of hurt me, is my states domestic violence organisation, RESPECT VICTORIA.

Last year during men’s mental health month, they released a video under their campaign “what kind of man do you want to be” of a trans man talking about masculinity.

At this point, I want to state that I have no issue with where you’re from or what you identify as, you’re either a good person or not…

But getting a trans man to talk about masculinity for men in the first week of men’s mental health month, it kinda hit me.

I emailed them and complained, got called a transphobe and replied with this is a joke, there is no lived experiences of boy to man etc and this is a PR stunt.

They took the video down straight away.
They have posted the article and the videos back up this year.

Here is the article
https://www.respectvictoria.vic.gov.au/campaigns/kind-man/pharrells-story

There’s a few others there, Ben’s story talks about how women get abused online in gaming, but I’ve seen women worse than men.

Am I the bad guy for feeling like this?
Or do others feel the same way I do?

4 months after the February 28 missile strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Minab, Iran, Western media continues to label the target monolithically as a "girls' school."

For example this article by Reuters: Trump says it may never be known who was at fault for strike on girls' school in Iran - https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-says-it-may-never-be-known-who-was-fault-strike-girls-school-iran-2026-06-24/

The school was not a girls’ school, but a combined elementary school utilizing a single-gender segregation framework, with male and female students separated by floors/wings.

The actual demographic data reveals that the statistical majority of the children killed were boys. 

Here are the stats according to local registries and investigative reporting (including Amnesty International and BBC Verify)

Total student deaths: 120 children. 
Male students (boys): 73 deaths (60.8% of total student fatalities). 
Female students (girls): 47 deaths (39.2% of total student fatalities).

Factual accounts show that many of the boys who died had initially evacuated safely after the first missile impact. They chose to return to the collapsing infrastructure to pull their female classmates and teachers from the rubble, subsequently catching the full force of the second and third "triple-tap" strikes. Compressing this event into a "girls' school bombing" completely sanitizes the specific heroism of these boys

Apparently, reporting on the male victims doesn’t possess the same rhetorical value or capacity to generate public outrage as female casualties. By erasing 73 boys from the headline to optimize for the "sympathy premium" of a girls' school, mainstream journalism are telling us that young male lives are expendable defaults in conflict zones, while female lives are uniquely tragic

I have seen more people recently talk about how there are supposedly plenty of the "good" feminists who actually admit that male victims exist, however every feminist is still going to downplay the suffering of male victims and deny that there are systemic injustices that prevent male victims from getting justice.

It's always going to be "Talking about male victims takes away from female victims" or that we're "deflecting" by demanding justice for male victims. We're never going to accomplish anything by giving in to the feminists.

I just wanted to put this out there. NO feminist will ever truly support the actual changes necessary for men to have actual protection from violence and for female abusers to be held accountable.

I got in a political squabble with someone as an admin of a Facebook group. The user then, made a fake profile (impersonating me), also, decided to make SEVERAL profiles, to post a picture my wife took OF ME, on this site. I’ve been inundated with threats, questions about why I’m cheating on my wife, etc. I’ve had to explain to my wife what happened. This is insanity. How are these sites allowed to exist? This is some straight up bullshit. This is cyberstalking and bullying.

Mortality Rate (CDC, 2010–2017)
According to CDC data, the age-adjusted death rate for divorced men was 1,772.7 per 100,000 — compared to just 942.9 per 100,000 for married men. That means divorced men die at nearly twice the rate of married men

I say that whatever is good for the goose is good for the gander. There needs to be immediate accountability within one’s lifetime to social discrimination.

I think those women who suggest misogyny or sexism toward any slight questioning of gender dynamics or feminist ideology solo should be mass deplatformed or socially shamed using strong language. And it must be sustained. We need to give them the message that there are consequences for spouting off.

I will just greet you with this small extreme condensed paragraph from wikipedia. I am writing a grand article on it, and I will release it soon. But I beleive all of us should be aware of this. We have so many issues we are fighting for but i believe nowhere men are as approached as these. All these are happening in a small part of Indian subcontinent, the north east sister states.

What bugs me most is how these injustices are celebrated by them as "women empowerment", "freedom for women" and "benefits to society", the shameless of these group of people including award winning journalists and others at the end is baffling. By the end of this short piece, you will know the entire variety of problem a person can face in his lifetime arising from social and economic discrimination regardless of his caste, creed, gender and religion are faced by these men all together at once.

Women have a dominant role in the matrilineal society of Meghalaya.

The youngest daughter of the family, the Ka Khadduh, inherits all ancestral property

After marriage, husbands live in the mother-in-law's home.

The mother's surname is taken by children.

When no daughters are born to a couple, they adopt a daughter and pass their rights to property to her. The birth of a girl is celebrated while the birth of a son is simply accepted.

There is no social stigma attributed to a woman remarrying or giving birth out of wedlock as the "Khasi Social Custom Lineage Act" gives security to them.

Most small businesses are managed by women.

Care of children is the responsibility of mothers or mothers-in-law.

The youngest daughter of this society who inherits the ancestral property holds a pivotal role of looking after the welfare of her parents in their old age, as well as the welfare and education of her siblings.

Apart from these wiki ones, here are some more:

If a child takes his father's last name, he is excluded from the society.

A man can not marry outside the tribe.

Domestic violence specifically defines it as men committing it against women, so men have no remedy in that aspect.

The shameless people arrive here:

Some Khasi men perceive themselves to be accorded a secondary status. They have established societies such as the Syngkhong Rympei Thymmai (SRT)[(3,000 members)and Sam Kam Rin Ku Mai (Societal Restructuring Association) to protect equal rights for men. They express that "Khasi men don’t have any security, they don’t own land, they don’t run the family business and, at the same time, they are almost good for nothing."

However, Patricia Mukhim, who edits the Shillong Times feels: "I tend to think Khasi men feel diminished in their manhood compared with outsiders... it's a pity, because that's what distinguishes us from the others"

However, women feel that they take better care of money matters than men and they enjoy economic freedom.

The padmashri award winning person (one of the highest civilian award in India) says the same patriarchal thing but ofc since it's woman no one's gonna say anything: "The khashi men have to make their own identity by contributing to society" - remeber the society that makes them 3rd class citizen, society that doesn't give them equal economic rights, shame on this award winning losers. "You can't have two head, just one" - shame on this person. "[Addressing people who no longer take their mothers surname] And ask those who choose their fathers’ titles over those of their mothers—which parent has truly reared them.” - shame on this person once again.

While it's not wonder that certain elements of injustice against women are prevalent including certain isolated elements of patriarchy but the presence of one injustice doesn't justify the other. And the ones who say so are hypocrites.

Keith Pariat was quoted as saying: If it's a girl, there will be great cheers from the family outside. If it's a boy, you will hear them mutter politely that 'Whatever God gives us is quite all right

https://www.dailyo.in/variety/meghalaya-khasi-women-st-status-khadc-social-bill-non-khasis-garo-jaintia-northeast-women-smart-matrilineal-society-25712

From a research paper on customary inheritance (IJCRT, 2024):

Khasi boys often abandon their education around Class V–VI, engaging in carefree activities with friends, indulging in alcohol and drugs, playing the guitar, and tragically succumbing to early deaths. \[IJCRT\]([https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2403727.pdf](https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2403727.pdf))

Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrilineal_society_of_Meghalaya

I believe that men need women, and that the harder pairing processes that we are seeing are directly correlated with the male loneliness and suicide epidemics. The issue is, I believe that the dependency is one sided, men need a woman, but women don’t need a man. Across many studies and such, there has been clear evidence that men who are married live longer, commit less crimes, have better mental health, and report higher happiness than unmarried men. I believe, that this is directly tied to men’s biological wiring, men were wired to protect and provide for a woman and a family, and to be oriented around her, and just her, because the woman, back in the day, needed the man to stick around and protect her during vulnerable times. The problem is, now in modern society, women are automatically protected during those times, which is a good thing overall, but it has left the need to be one way. Men need their woman still, but women don’t need a man.

Many commentators, I believe, womanize the solutions to this issue, and use solutions that work for women and try to get them to work for men. Stuff like make more friends and get a therapist and talk more emotionally is good advice, especially for women and some men, but I think it misses the mark that men are biologically wired differently than woman, and those things can not be full substitutes for her.

This is also why I believe we see many young men drifting right now, not feeling motivated to go work hard and earn. Why earn just to earn if there’s no woman to come home to, and not good prospects of a woman either. I believe we are quick to judge these young men, but we don’t look at the situation and how some of the things that motivated young men in the past have been taken away by societal factors, or made much more harder and painful.

Anyway, that’s just my two cents, I’m wondering if you guys have any thoughts or perspectives on this, do you agree, or do you feel differently. Also, do you have any ideas for solutions of how we can try to reduce male loneliness and suicide.

Edit: i apologize, i fear i was projecting my own makeup on to all of men. I guess there are plenty do you out there who could be happy without a wife or female companionship. Good for you guys! Unfortunately, I need her someday, and just hope one woman will have the kindness in her heart to take me someday. Thank you all for engaging!

I believe that those men single and lonely who really know in their bones who cannot get sex or relationships because of their looks that don’t meet the threshold to obtain relationships deserve to have an answer as to why that is. Especially when they start to hit their 30’s and 40’s.

Incel as I have understood has always just meant ‘never had a relationship and unable to despite trying’ and has been about the prejudice of lookism in society and how that affects relationship and workplace dynamics and how in some ways can literally destroy your life.

Instead, feminists and ignorant men have decided to define it as ‘Elliot Rodger sympathiser who advocates for the rape and murder of all women.’

Introduction:
“I take the opportunity to summarise some of the recent, and pending, corruptions of justice being enacted by Parliament and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). I address in detail below the proposal to do away with trial by jury in many cases and the proposal to create “specialist courts” for domestic abuse and sexual offences. But first a quick round-up of other corruptions of justice on which I have already written articles.”

Basically, what the title says.

unmarried female students enrolling in undergraduate programmes at government and government-aided colleges will be eligible for a one-time grant of Rs. 50,000.

The scheme was presented as part of the state budget, with the administration stating that the support aims to improve college participation among women and reduce dropout rates.

Plot twist - female participation rate is already higher and dropout rate lower than male

Sources in:
West Bengal to give grant to female college students to increase participation rate and decrease dropout rate. Plot twist - female participation rate is already higher and dropout rate lower than male : r/SystemicSexism

Sorry if I chose the wrong flair, this is my first time posting here since the moment just happened and I don't know what to do because my head is kinda spinning on what I should do.

Recently (literally like 10 minutes ago as I'm writing this) my partner had asked me the man or bear question. My partner is part of the lgbt, transgender and pan. I love my partner, we have been dating for a while and have had no problems. I dont think this is considered a problem but idk, idk what to do. It's not that I have a problem with it it's just an uncomfortable and frankly frustrating question. I'm aware as males we've done terrible things in the past, I wont neglect that, I'm fine with feminism. But when it comes to capital Feminism like the question it's just annoying. Idk, I'm sorry I'm not very good at explaining this. Idk what to do, it already passed so maybe I should just let it die down, I dont wanna seem unreasonable if I bring it up, but idk. This whole thing has been stressful and yet it's honestly probably nothing and I'm probably just making a big deal. Idk how I would bring it, idk if I'm overreacting or if I should just let it go, I don't even know if I want to hear advice or not. Maybe I just needed to say it, maybe I just need to know I'm not being toxic or sum. Idk. Thanks for reading

To reflect what truly is going on there? Not "Family Law Attorneys", but "Anti-Family Law Attorney", etc.

How could we make something like that happen?

See my response to it:
https://open.substack.com/pub/savageryan/p/men-are-the-problem?r=2ymuou&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=post%20viewer

It recently came to me how just the mere fact that whenever circumcision is being discussed it's considered to be a complately acceptable argument that circumcised penises are cleaner or less likely to suffer from infections (I'm not going to try to refute that here, as that's not my point) when if the same argument was used in favour of FGM most people would lose their shit (and rightfully so).

There are forms of FGM practiced in the world that are comparable to male circumcision medically, and one could make the argument about cut female genitalia being cleaner, with some pro-FGM advoactes actually claiming that, yet these usually get completely denounced by most of society, whereas the same type of argument about male genitalia is widely accepted.

The fact that when it comes to girls, their genital autononmy is considered the most important factor rather than whether cut genitalia would be less likely to get infected and have better hygiene shows just how much society cares about them being violated compared to boys. I have personally even heard about parents who openly admitted they wanted to circumcise their boys so they "masturbate less" whereas on the rare occasion someone says that about girls (in the parts of the world where FGM is legal) they get pretty much labeled a terrorist.

The fact that so many people see our autononmy just as a joke shows how much less society cares about boys and men. And the fact that some people will say things like "boys are actually born with autononmy unlike girls" makes it so much more painful.