I have been trying to comprehend, maybe even understand why male feminists exist. One does not see any females trying to destroy themselves for being female but we do have these traitors in society and one does wonder what their motives are. Are they today's Brutus or Iscariot or just traitors to all ?..
I am of the opinion that those miscreants have decided that the only way they are going to enjoy copious amount of sex is to empathise and try to convince women that they are really on their side. We have already read the confessions of Prof. Scwhyzer, bragging about his access to young, nubile members of the opposite sex and has no problems stretching them out on his office table. We have examples of other feminist she-males like JovanB(a blogger and feminist she-male contestant) displaying on their web sites that they support PORN as well as BDSM activity and one does have to wonder whether their motives are dishonorable as well as devious. They both apply ofcourse and I have a sneaking suspicion that if these male imitators were out in the public sphere they would be irrelevant, insignificant and whimsical, not real men but pathetic imitations, not alphas but third grade betas who's relevance would be questionable, ignored and dismissed as being juvenile..
We have such sites and orgs like Nomas ( Pro-feminist, gay-affirmative, anti-racist, enhancing men's lives.) which is obviously just another attempt by feminists at ensuring all men and boys are neutered as soon as possible as a neutered males can be controlled a lot easier.
It’s true that too many feminists point the finger at “men” in general—as if “men” were no more than a homogenous mass of beer-swilling, crotch-scratching sexists. Books like Natasha Walter’s Living Dolls read rather like long lists of unanswerable complaints, punctuated by moralising tales about prostitution. If feminism is to remain useful, a more coherent and courageous approach is needed. Only through a radical reorganisation of men and women’s economic participation at home, at work, in life and in love will we begin to address the damage that regressive gender roles continue to inflict on both sexes. If feminism has failed in its objectives, it has failed men too. If it is not to fail again, it must achieve them in collaboration with men—not in spite of them.The idiom that feminists have determined is that there is something wrong with Men per se, without actually balancing out the positives. They are determined to malign and destroy anything male, due to the fact that a minutiae break the law and deserve to be throw into prison, which I have no problem with. But, they blame the behaviour of a few on the entire sex while at the same time ignoring and denying that women are just as abusive and capable of breaking the law. That's the hypocrisy ofcourse, women do nothing wrong, only men do..
It does not matter to them that that double-think is beyond comprehension, totally without verification while the majority of men just get on with their daily lives and thereby improving the lives of those around them.
The other point is that the only "benefit" that feminism have had on men is something that they (men) have introduced themselves, feminism has in no way benefited men as they claim, men have decided that marriage and being a financial wage slave to the opposite sex is not a realistic option ever since feminists have manipulated a myriad of laws and demands that is designed to destroy our existence rather than benefit it. Women on the other hand have grasped the male-hating nettle that feminists have instituted with wanton abandon and are only now realising by the many articles we read from women complaining that the feminist claim that women can "have it all" is not only detrimental to their very existence by placing untold pressure on them to perform but realise that it was just a dream to think that women were capable of such intense behaviour without affecting their health and well-being.Their brainwashing is complete and a few are finally waking up..
So male feminists do not have any affect on any benefit for males. Their own capitulation to the sexism that they promote is not only abhorrent and detrimental, it does nothing to enhance, even slightly, the lives of man and boy. They are hypocrites of the first degree and traitors to their own sex and should be declared persona non gratis by all and sundry. Even female feminists have continually voiced the opinion that they should not be part of the "women's movement" as their motives demonstrate that they are only interested in promoting themselves and are only in it for own benefit..
Feminism has already poisoned the male sex to such a degree that potential sex changes should be viewed as a preferred option..
Is it possible that an individual so hated the sex they were born with that it sparked a life long academic quest to deconstruct it into something that did not disgust them? Is it possible that the fruits of those efforts were easily embraced by others who may have had issues of their own with traditional masculinity? Not intellectual issues, but intrapersonal ones. And is, as Nathanson alluded to, the misandry being bred by feminists, just part and parcel to the ideology itself, as it is practiced in the halls of higher education and in society at large?The academic's pursuit of this topic would appear to have an ulterior motive as it permits them to malign and demonstrate their anti-male stance without recourse, demonstrating that it may be a viable option that some individual suffering from GID (gender identity disorder) will want to identify as the other. There are no limits to the amount of female imitators as far as I am aware but I don't see them line up to have their organ butchered for the sake of relieving some psychological condition..
One thing is certain. Raewyn Connell’s view of masculinity is not a product of scholarly pursuit, but of mental illness; a pathological hatred of a particular sex, in this case male. And when that is true of the preeminent authority in a field of study with such far reaching sociological ramifications, then it is time to make a change.
Here we have more of their cognitive dissonance..
Abstract
Feminist therapy has a unique history in counseling and psychotherapy. This unique history has had an impact on the development of the modality which includes combining methods and ideologies from diverse therapeutic frameworks while still maintaining a core set of principles. While intended originally for women, feminist therapy is argued here also to be a useful resource for men. The traditional masculinist perspective, assumed to be appropriate for men, is argued to not address diverse experiences men bring to therapy, but rather to support dominant prescriptive desires of a patriarchal culture. Utilizing tenets from various feminist theories, this article will argue how men can benefit from feminist therapy when practitioners reject essentializing men, recognize diversity in men's gender identity, help male clients understand the effects of normative masculine conformity and assist them in understanding their varying engagements with male privilege.
The interesting thing is that I produced an MP3 (on Male Feminists) in which I quoted an article from "Janice Erlbaum is the author of GIRLBOMB:" about male feminists being Oxymorons or simply Morons..
That article has disappeared (erased) for obvious reason as feminists say one thing and mean the other..
But ofcourse, nothing disappears on the web..
No courage of their conviction and I would imagine that the whining male feminists were offended by female feminists stating the obvious. I do wonder just how effective that MP3 was..
