Hilary Rosen is just another typical slut feminist, all and every trait of the typical attributes, that the slut feminists have, can be applied to this hypocrite. Be it goggle visioned outlook, refusal to look at the whole picture, blinded by political tunnel vision or demonstrating outright hate and malice towards anyone daring not to follow it's disingenuous, narrow minded, dyslexic mindset that the slut feminists have already demonstrated via copious examples. To state otherwise, would just be denying the nose on your face..

Update.. The DNC accused conservatives of attacking Rosen for being a lesbian. The adoptive mother of two children, Rosen split up with her long-timepartner and co-adoptee Elizabeth Birch in 2006.

Not to be mistaken for Hanna Rosen and "The End of Men"..

This poisonous marxist and professional hypocrite, once again demonstrates that women are their targets as well. That is, any female who has the temerity to think normally and not blindly and obsessively hate everyone, spread the appropriate malice that is. Rosen is the typical example of the slut feminist supporter and enabler, while completely disowning their blatant lie that they are for 'Equality", where in actual fact they just continually push the progressives agenda without considering outcomes, effects or it's destructiveness. Being a typical progressive ensures that those changes must be made for the sake of it and has nothing to do with improvement or practicality. We have already witnessed what women do when they have the necessary allocated power to fulfill their own level of narcissism and achieving their own outcomes, regardless of the lives they destroy while giving no consideration to the damage they cause..

They believe in change for change sake and there are no limitations to that aim..

Here is a statement from Slate's XX's misandry site -

The real problem with what Rosen said is the way it feeds into some voters’ assumptions about daaangerous feminism. It reinforces the conviction Rick Santorum wrote about when he suggested that “[r]espect for stay-at-home mothers has been poisoned by … radical feminism’s misogynistic crusade to make working outside the home the only marker of social value and self-respect.” I don’t think Santorum’s is a fair assessment, but I'm also not an undecided voter in a swing state that Barack Obama needs to win over. By pitting working moms against stay-at-homes with divisive language, Rosen feeds Santorum's argument. She makes feminists seem angry instead of inclusive. And she makes Obama's appeal to women of all types that much harder.

We already know that the slut feminist movement hate "stay at home mums", for the single reason being that they want them in the workforce, slaving for the dollar, just like everyone else. They are also very aware of the fact that mothers actually enjoy that well practised method of living and the harmony that it brings. How many times have we witnessed high flying female executives resigning to do just that. How many more times does that have to happen for that hate movement to actually change their misogynistic attitude, which contradicts their entire doctrine and demonstrates clearly what hypocrites they really are. That they are just pushing their own political agenda..

Rosin buying votes..
Stated Rosen: “When I gave $1,000 or $2,000 to a lawmaker, I wanted him to listen to my business proposition. And when I helped organize an event that raised $50,000 or $100,000, you bet I expected their vote.”

About a decade ago, that misogynistic movement tried to mend the fence they trampled down by claiming that they were working for the "SAHM", another lie ofcourse, as they were gathering plenty of flack and they had to adjust their usual hypocrisy to cope, as they normally do. After the storm quietened down, they just went beck to their farcical existence and just recommenced destroying the family unit plus went right back to playing that same game they were before concerning themselves with the SAHM issue. So it is another case of "Rinse, Repeat, Rinse, Repeat". That practice is so far ingrained into that movement as to make it their normally practiced, standard procedure..


Applying the "Carrot before the Donkey" principal.

The other flaw that Rosin demonstrates is that have no apparent ability of seeing exactly "what women want", because if they did, they would leave the SAHMs alone and let sleeping dogs lie. But as they claim to speak for every single female on the planet, not by popular demand or any democratic process. They just demanded and assumed that to be the case. Not too many women have taken the opportunity to state otherwise, sadly, as they continue on their path of partner, sex and societal alienation..

That hate movement have relied on the "look at what we have done for you" argument and thereby demand that anything else they do, should also be supported without question, regardless of it's intentions, aims or goals..

What we do need to see on any recognisable scale is a movement from women that states "Feminists Do Not Speak for ME". That general statement has been continually stated on comments and articles I have come across. Maybe it is about time those women being continually malogned by those misogynists, started to get a little more serious about given that hate movement some opposition, as in reality, they are not for harmony or honour or dignity or equality and that being the case, they need to be removed from the equation..

Update..

Hilary Rosen banked millions destroying Napster

Back in the early 1990's there were some general hysteria sessions on the old bulletin boards, as the Men's movement started up against the slut-feminist hatred movement, when I and a few others, suggested that women were themselves to blame for the movement and not just a minor selection of of both sexes..

At that time, that nasty movement spent all of it's time abusing and denigrating males in Newspapers, Magazines and on Television. The hate march was that blatant, that it ensured that I would take up that cudgel as I could see back then that this was not something that was not going to improve by ignoring it or that women would in general would come to their senses and start behaving like human beings and see the error of their totally self-focused, selfish and society breaking practices..

After three decades, we have a completely worse situation as this speaker explains. Nothing will improve or change if men and women (those minutia of females), do not begin making waves and begin solidifying, amassing and promoting our the actions of the anti-slut-feminist movement. When it was stated a few years back that it was a "War between the Sexes", it was not some irrelevant rant, but an actual representation of the truth. It is exactly the way it is..

Nothing will change if we do nothing. Nothing will improve if we ignore or sit on our hands. Slut-Feminism is a women's movement and it was never about equality, it is purely about superiority as we can witness on a daily basis. There has never been any "adjustment" or "reconciliation" efforts made in any fashion by Slut-feminists in order to balance any outcome. It is unfortunately the case that whatever women are given in the way of rights, funding or benefits, it will never be enough and the collective scream will always be for ever more and more..

All at the cost of Men and boys. We are the sacrificial offering at the alter of female supremacy and they neither give a damn as to how much it will cost, how many lives they destroy or how many more extras they achieve, they will not stop or relent or decrease their demands until men are totally deprived of their freedom and their self respect completely destroyed. There will be no compromise in that area as they brainwash future generations of women with their hate and malice..

More Men are waking up and joining the good fight..

The Non-Violent Females that are continually denied by radical feminists..

A few months back when Agent Orange located an excessive amount of information from one of the radical feminists sites, it gave way for Kyle Lovett to do some more research on the people involved on that male hating site. Betty McLellan turned out to be one of those radicals who not only visited and wrote articles for the site but also attended the SCUM (Society for Cutting up Men) Manifesto Conference in Perth Western Australia in September 2011. She was also tracked to Queensland where her vitriol is still being exposed in the media today, with very little response from the public..

That was the case until Greg decided he had had enough and promptly responded in a way that makes us all proud. Well done Greg, splendid effort. Here is the information I came across that was exposed in one of Queensland's Country Newspapers and we finally have the deeds and actions of this radical feminist on public record. One entry that will haunt her endlessly and hopefully not the last..

This is what it's all about. Exposing those radical feminists is and should be our ongoing goal, let the public know what nasty human beings these women really are and let them also know that they are living amongst them while they are plotting to destroy their lives, their families and their society, purely for their own selfish reasons and for their own benefit..

I am not going to expose that article that McLellan wrote as basically I did not think it necessary to expose that here as it contained the usual vitriolic nastiness that we have come to expect from male haters like McLellan. But here is the rest of that exposed information..

More Hollywood feminist Propaganda..

One can understandably be confused by the attitudes of the opposite sex when it comes to feminism, their own part in it's growth and nurturing, it's interference into laws and the family courts, wonder why they are having problems with finding a partner, blame the male sex for all their issues, and yet, still not make one single confession about how they were party to it all. Their overall attitude appears to be "well it's happened", so lets move on. The blinkering process is ofcourse part of the female behavioral pattern and mindset, it demonstrates clearly that they nor feminists, will ever admit to being party to the most destructive upheaval society has ever known. All this came about with their compliance, with their help and assistance and now that the end result of feminist meddling is glaringly obvious, they look the other way and pretend that it was something they had no control over whatsoever..

How is that working out for you now I wonder..

The endless carping by female journalists and feminist enablers demostrates also that the outcome they wished for was just a dream. Radical feminists are still working on that reality outcome which ofcourse will never be achieved. But meanwhile, we have the ongoing carping about the sexes and the end result being, that a movement run by women in order to install special privileges for women at the cost of all men, has not delivered what they assumed it would and there has to be blame metered out and its for certain that the privileged sex ain't gonna wear it even though they are totally responsible and answerable for it..

Have a look at this article and a few paragraphs I pulled from it to demonstrate precisely how these female journalist enjoys nothing more than blaming men for what women have gained from..
(Link to article)

This message seems to have come through especially loud and clear in Italy where it is only too easy to find men who are the embodiment of the self-indulgent stereotype. The effeminate man-child is a plague in Italy; vain, self-important, shallow and self-seeking mamma’s boys who live in their parents’ house into their thirties and forties. The once-family oriented Italians are increasingly either divorcing or refusing to marry in the first place.

Italian journalist Rosaria Sgueglia writes in the Huffington Post that the former master of the Costa Concordia is one of those Italian men who match the stereotype point for point. Italians are “furious,” she wrote, at “people like Mr. Schettino [who] do nothing but compromise the already damaged image the rest of the world has of Italian people.”

Now as far as I can tell, the female journalist writing this article is supposed to be on our side, enemies like these eh!.
But, as you can read and even if you read the entire article, there is not one single word of blame aimed at her own sex or even bothers to point it out except when referring to the feminastie movement as being the only one accountable which is ofcourse only half true. It is the usual demonstration of living in denial as they obviously and blatantly shirk their own responsibility and accountability because they are so pissed off with the way things have turned out and they are now well aware of the fact that there is absolutely nothing they do about it. Their generation will pay for the excesses and now they live in regret and in some cases, in abstract terror as their own dreams are shattered beyond repair. Life in their opinion, is not supposed to be this hard. It's all been turned upside down and they are absolutely besides themselves wondering how it got this bad..

We have been telling them for years that this will be the outcome. We have stated it precisely, patiently and consistently and did they listen, no way. All those euphoric goals promised by lying feminists were just too good, too imaginable, to easily achieved and guaranteed as they manipulated employment laws and promotions. They were basically given everything they wished for and took the rest for granted. I would like to think of it as payback but I think that is a little too simplistic. It is more like a rational response where men have been washed and scrubbed in the feminist toxicity and decided that maybe that relationship or partner can legally do me over without even trying and I stand the chance of loosing everything I have to an individual who has already demonstrated that she is incapable of keeping in a relationship for any period of time, will automatically call on legal representatives as a standard procedure, just to see what she can get out of it all, it has to be made worth her while..

None of it looks like it worth it or even workable anymore. The parents never had these issues, so obviously it's this current generation or three, that has decided on the tactics they want to use, so why bother to give them any chance at all. It will be the case where all this will get worse before it gets any better.  Even that remains to be seen as women generally are more interested in complaining about it all rather than actually doing something positive about it. That first step would the hardest for them, it would mean they would have to accept some accountability, if not all the blame and I do not see that happening, ever..

Being a women is just so hard and difficult apparently, hard enough according to feminists that sexism and discriminating against men and boys is excusable and justified ofcourse. We have a sex that is so totally focused on itself that one is just words short, at trying to describe it. The actions by women is not only incomprehensible, it makes any action that feminists claim against our sex, pale into insignificance..

The sexism, discrimination and the anti-male vitriol is openly demonstrated on a daily basis and we have zero in the MSM even bothering to question their actions or even pose any questions apart from agreeing with it.

Since when does one determine which sex has the harder life and the other the easiest. Feminists have already ordained that their religious followers ensure that the female sex is always the victim, regardless of circumstances, in order to justify their misandry..

Here is just another example of their sexism and bias..

‘Only girls allowed' 

Plan UK’s campaign, which highlights the plight of the world’s poorest girls, launches a groundbreaking interactive ad on a bus stop in Oxford Street on February 22.
The advert uses facial recognition software with an HD camera to determine whether a man or woman is standing in front of the screen, and shows different content accordingly.
Passing shoppers can opt-in to view the ad and find out more about Plan’s work to help some of the world’s poorest girls. Men and boys are denied the choice to view the full content in order to highlight the fact that women and girls across the world are denied choices and opportunities on a daily basis due to poverty and discrimination.
Plan’s Because I am a Girl campaign aims to support four million girls in developing countries to have more choices about what they do with their life.

Link for more on the article..

Instead of taking the sex out of the argument, feminists go out of their way to ensure that only females are the sole target and will use that old and tired argument they have used in the past decades justifying their sexism and bias. They refuse to move on and they also flatly refuse to make any effort to calm the sex war but instead prefer to continually fan the flames to ensure the battle continues and the animosity grows and festers..

It is no longer necessary to claim that the feminist movement is a hate movement as they now so aptly demonstrate it very clearly themselves using your tax dollars to discriminate against you. To them, it's poetic justice..

Advert on Oxford Street shown only to women

The screen showing the short video campaign, by children's charity Plan UK, is located at a bus stop opposite Selfridges on Oxford Street.
A camera will measure facial features of the person standing at the screen to decide whether it is a man or a woman. It guesses right 90% of the time.
If it is a male, the screen will direct him to the charity's campaign website.

Just one more guffaw session about Hugo and I will let it go. It has been such an ongoing hobby over the past few years to demonstrate precisely what male feminists are really all about that once they are thrown under the bus by their female masters, one stands back in incredulity and wonders how they could justify it all. But justify they did even if it was only in their own tiny, bigoted, narrow minds..

When you have a look at Schwyzer's overall zeal at promoting that male hate movement, one would witness a fanatic at work. Apart from endless demonstrations of cognitive dissonance that every feminists must possess, you would not find a more dedicated and hard working whipping boy than Hugo. So why did they toss him under the bus? Solely because he was a male, the angst sisters recognised the fact that he was better at it then they were and they were loosing the argument as well as loosing control of their menopausal baby. Radical feminists are back in control and Hugo was in the way as their hatred for all males is palpable and constant, Hugo just had to go, the loathing and verbal detritus does not come any more concentrated than in a radical feminist's hate for all men. Probably because most are indeed lesbians. That may seem like some cop out but it is unfortunately true and can be easily verified. Check the RadFem Hub for verification. You could easily compare the hate for males to a similar event in the second world war against the jews, the comparison is real..

Feminism's last gasp is currently being played out as they are only just kicking rocks, wandering through the desert, looking for minutiae to wallow in. Even Steinem has transferred her loathing and hate sessions to Arab countries as there is much more obsessive behaviour that she can throw a grenade into..

The Atlantic has just published an article regarding the exile of Hugo Schwyzer from the feminist camp. America’s most vocal male feminist ally has just been kicked to the curb by the feminists who he so worshiped. Schwyzer has made a career of writing articles that have promoted a self-emasculating viewpoint in favor of promoting feminist ideas. Until recently, he wrote a series of articles on the Good Men Project, politely telling men how horrible they were and particularly telling the world that “the answer to men’s rights was more feminism.”

Yep, that was Hugo's answer to everything, more feminism to fix the same problems that feminism has created and is responsible for. Obviously, Hugo has absolutely no idea what he is talking about and he is going to find out exactly what happens when more feminism is applied, better still, he has already found that out..

Hugo thrown under the Bus..

Living with PMS is not even in the equation. It's normal Behaviour..

Lauren Lyster, who I have never heard of before and preferably from the arrogant, self serving blather it comes up with, wish I never had the displeasure..

Lister tone and comments demonstrates the typical arrogance and rudeness that American Women automatically waffle and their reputations warrant, speaks like it's ordering lunch or requesting to try on some new shoes. The usual and typical comment ,where as far as she is concerned, men are only on this planet to serve women and grant them everything they need and require. Bear in mind that females like this have been given automatic promotion and a one way ticket to an obscene income that the majority would never see in their lifetime..

Lauren Lyster dismisses men who have recently been laid off as "not the creme de la creme". She considers men to be not human beings, but merely human do-ings, to be considered worthless and disposable as soon as they are not serving as a pack mule and provider-workhorse to a woman.

As usual, the smugness of this women is not only incomprehensible but also demonstrates clearly that when you give a woman everything she wants, she is never happy. I am always taken back about how easily women can mouth abuse and make derogatory remarks about men but return that attitude to these selfish, self serving human wastes and wait for the hysterics. Not only is it sickening but it is now the standard behaviour of these women who have got it all but when it comes down to it, they really  do not possess anything that one would want, nothing. Neither manners, dignity, honour and are only interested in their own aggrandisement. Yep, any and every opportunity taken to denigrate others and in this case "Wall street" men, who in her opinion are really just a waste of time as she is so superior..

Wow, it makes them so attractive does it not, One would be lining up to spend some cathartic time with her eh!..
Another similar example is Dowd, who has been bitching for years that no male wants to have anything to do with it (men cannot handle "strong" women) and amazingly wonders why. A total cretin, a typical feminist. Spends her entire life heaping scorn on all males and like Lyster, as far as I can tell, is no different..

These are the type of women I like to hate for obvious reasons. She reminds me of other cretins of the same ilk like Marcotte, and other miscreants, who for the sake of their own egos have to put other people down. It is just the way they are and it makes them "feel" better about themselves, somehow, it  is pitiful and childish but a good example of how to behave when you really have nothing left but your own ego to maintain. It caps off the conversation with that sickening and done to death saying "as a woman", another loathsome insignificant comment that somehow assumes it speaks for all women but meanwhile just demonstrates it's imaginary superior illusion..

Have a listen to the comments right at the end on dating as it calls in another one of it's ilk to have a moaning and bitching session. Just imagine having to wake up next to that in the morning and going through life trying to manage a dignified relationship with it. I'd rather be a monk..

UPDATE..

Oops, forgot the commentary..This is an imitation of Wikipedia and a different version of events according to some, who apparently have a sense of humour.  They must be of the same opinion as I about Wikipedia which has become a laughable joke as way too many people have already confessed to changing information according to their doctrinal leanings, instead of telling and entering the truth or facts..

The AGW hysteric Hansen and Johann Hari -

The columnist has also confessed to editing his own Wikipedia entry -- as well as those of others with whom he had disagreements, in "ways that were juvenile or malicious". The admission follows an investigation into his conduct by ex-Independent editor Andreas Whittam Smith.

Wikipedia may just as well be a comedy just like this site is..


UncyclopediA

Feminism is a movement aimed at the promotion of parity between the sexes in political, economic and social rights, with particular emphasis of improving the position of women. Feminists believe that Women are equal to Men. They believe that by believing in such equality they prove themselves to be superior.

Allied to this cause is the notion that women are superhuman beings with god-like wisdom, and yet at the same time fragile little girls. In compensation for years of subjugation, women should, and must, have absolute power over men, and until they do, every woman is so oppressed that she cannot possibly be held responsible for anything she does.

The early campaigners for the vote: The Lollagettes

In the early 1900s when feminists campaigned for the vote (lollage), much violence occurred. Certain feminists were simply not aroused enough by the 'peaceful' regime which involved the frequent molestation of the most senior prime ministers! They broke away from the NUWSS (Naked udderless women seeking sexuality) and became the WSPU (Whale sex pornography unlimited). Demanding their right to vote (suffrage) but for women known as lollage, they were names the Lollagettes.

Even though women received the vote after publicly memorizing the first five letters of the alphabet in 1993, to this day a number of blonde lollagettes still campaign...

Menstruation

Captain Carly, better known as Leslie, is a strong supporter of the feminist movement since he became one in 1819, he was the first boy to become a girl and turn into a feminist.

Serious objections have been raised to this name, because of its male based first syllable. New suggestions are womenstruation, girlstruation, lesbstruation, bleedingbitchstruation and wecontrolallmendoasyouaretoldstruation, "Frustration" also works and it has the best description already for it. When it was pointed out that the root of the word was not actually men but menstrus - which is Latin for "month," the feminists killed 17 men in retaliation for pointing out one of the many flaws in their logic. It has since become taboo to point out any flaws in a feminist's logic.

Feminist Theology
“All men are rapists and that's all they are.”
~ Marilyn French

Feminists have, like jews, 10 commandments in which all feminists must swear are true before becoming an accepted believer.
Men do not have 10 times as much testosterone as women.
Men are socially constructed.
Men are assholes.
Witchcraft is safer and more reliable than math and science.
Lesbianism can conjure up babies (but only females).
Women having total power is equal (superior).
Males are a different species from females.
Dicks are evil.
False rape/stalking/gay allegations are a mighty sword feminist are proud to wield.
Women are super-human.

These Ten Commandments were revealed to ancient feminists by the (obviously) female prophet "Joses", "which is where men who killed Joses got their name for Jesus and Moses, both hopeless rapists".

Feminists also claim that heaven was on Earth and the world was completely sexless and peaceful after God banished Adam to his room for tricking Eve into masturbating with an apple. However, Adam was soon let out and joined with the devil, causing destruction and sexual desires all across the world. The only way to repent, feminists say, is to "give your wife the male position" and let her rape your ass till' the Earth will nova in 2012.
“When a woman reaches orgasm with a man she is only collaborating with the patriarchal system, eroticizing her own oppression...”
~ Sheila Jeffrys

Herstory

Feminists believe that men have dominated history, and women have been ignored, with few exceptions. Their response is to reclaim history as herstory and show the world the importance of women. Again - do not try to point out the flawed logic of this idea, as 'history' is in fact derived from the Greek/Latin historias meaning knowledge or learning - nothing whatsoever to do with men.

The first person on the moon is now Nellie Armstrong, and the most famous leader of Rome is now Julie Caesar. Gloria Steinem and Rosie O'Donnell are now to be thought of as male.

Mainstream herstorians widely regard "history" as "utter bullcrap," as women have yet to prove themselves capable of anything outside of their traditional roles of "baking and baby-making," and it is unlikely that any such event has ever occurred. It is worth pointing out due to female failure in their two traditional pursuits, they are about as "valuable to society as a bicycle to a fish."

Origin

Modern Feminism was originally put forward as a joke in ancient Greek times by Ironicles, a philosopher and close friend of Aristotle, and after whom we have the English word irony, a joke nobody understands. Ironicles presented the idea as a satirical view of a society out of control, stating "where the women feel beauty is wrong, where the horses ride women, and who the hell invited the reindeer?" (See: Soviet Russia). The confusion over the last point was recently cleared up when evidence was found of an audience member (most likely Popsicles) proclaiming "get the stupid sod off, she's been on the wine again....tosspot." It is rumored that 115 years later, the great Testicles was castrated by a rabid feminist, released into the Colosseum too early. Apparently, Greek culture had a great influence on Saxons as well.

Is that Taunting ?

There are still a few things that gladdens my little heart and that is the sacrificial offering feminists make of their own, hoisting themselves on their own petards..

The self-immolation of Schwyzer and Marcotte is a sheer pleasure to watch. As some may already know, the GMP (Good Men Project, a feminist enabler site) appears to have come to the realisation that feminism is up against the wall and disappearing faster than this morning's fog, they need to introduce an attitude shift if they want to survive the steamrolling affect the MM has finally engineered, constructed and is currently steering in their (Feminist) direction. Anyone who does not see that obvious state, does not deserve to survive..

I for one have demonstrated what Hugo Schwyzer was and is all about, over many years. Here is a pretend feminist of the worst example, one who not only claims to be a speaker on feminist issues but also claims to have some magic formula for turning men into the pathetic example of himself. A confused, self loathing male who pedestallises women, solely to serve his need for their affirmation. This pathetic example has already confessed to behaviour that most would be jailed for and rightly so. But here he is, serving as a "Women's Studies" professor at Pasadena City College, allowed and permitted to carry out his own claims of bedding young students and steering hapless males into his own theoretical hell by claiming it has some relevance to their lives. The entire episode is way past sickening and the long term consequences of his interferences will be a long time coming..

People like Schwyzer should be locked away, treated and helped, not given a position as a lecturer in an establishment that affect young adult minds..

Here is one example of his fetishes -

He Wants to Jizz on Your Face, but Not Why You Think

The article is just another example of self promotion and staying the course with usual rabid use of feminist terminology while trying to infuse some level of indifference on a topic that he apparently prefers to raise. Most of the male feminists, are a gaping example on how the psychology industry reqiures some major reconstruction in order to recognise obvious conditions applicable to their field of interest..

Here are the examples of the hand-wringing and angst levels that Hugo has probably deliberately instigated..

xuananigans:
As a feminist who is a friend of Hugo Schwyzer’s, I’m very disheartened to see that there are self-identified feminists who would take such a reactionary stance against Hugo without looking at his words, actions, roles, and past in context. It’s a disappointing moment in history when we as a movement attempt to expel our best members based on quotes and accusations carefully culled to be as misleading and inflammatory as possible, simply because someone doesn’t fit the mold of being the perfect feminist with an always do-gooder past and the right demographic background.

 The problem some people have is, they are incapable of actually seeing what "looking at his words, actions, roles, and past in context" actually means. Those hazy, rose coloured, femi-tinted, glasses will have that affect..

STFU Sexists - As a feminist who does not have a personal relationship with Hugo Schwyzer, allow me to completely insincerely and disingenuously apologize for making you disheartened when I and my own feminist friends spoke out about our discomfort for having this man as the mouthpiece of feminism.
If, at any point, any of my close personal friends starts a fairly lucrative career based upon saying the same things that women have been saying for decades while relating it back to how it affects his white male self — and it comes to light that he totes tried to murder someone but it’s all okay now!!! — feel free to not take my friend’s miraculous transformation at face value.

It really is a laugh a minute. But I am sure a lot more commentary will follow as they fanny back and forth, trying to justify their own preconceived ideas without actually facing the reality of it, at all..

Feminists Against Hugo Schwyzer.

Marcotte Later, now there's a topic..

There are a few things we know for an absolute fact..

Feminists has the backing from some very rich private sources like Billionaire George Soros, as well as quite a few others..
There is a direct link between Marxism, Socialism and Feminism, there is no doubt whatsoever, it's  directly attached via an umbilical cord, the over zealous left wing's determination to ensure their doctrines of influence are introduced and in the long term it will be the men who will continue to pay the price and that path to eventually include women as well as they rail them into the governments handouts which they will not be able to do without..

The gradual and consistent reduction of human rights can also be witnessed with the introduction of laws like VAWA, the "Safe at Home" legislation and also the new legislation the Gillard Government(Aus) wants in place under the guidance of radical feminists. All that legislation is designed to transfer additional powers to women and reduce the rights of all men. It is that simple. Plenty of example are already quite visible and if you refuse to accept that or believe it, go to a family court hearing and watch how they throw the Father's rights straight into the rubbish bin while priority is given to the "mother". This is a well known fact as well. Very rarely will you see justice actually done as  feminist influences increases..

How does all this affect the people involved in that industry, they can easily point out the "Dads" who have suicided, I can give you a list of four from the last two years..

Below are some names of those hypocritical left wing anti-capitalists, those wealthy promoters, whose hypocrisy glaringly stands out like a shining beacon of stupidity and sheer arrogance. These are the same people who fund  their other society goals and aims like feminism..

I have no problem with anyone making money but it should at least be used for good, not malice..

Most of these hypocrites have lead the life of luxury, they have sucked the profits out of anything they can get their hands on. They play the system in every possible way. Soros' fortune was made paying no more than 10% tax on the billions he has. He has lived off the taxpayer's hard work and here he is promoting the feminist religion that he uses to enrich himself even further, while at the same time promoting this hate movement like it will benefit all and sundry, when in reality is just causes more pain and suffering.
One does have to wonder what their long term motives are, whether it is following the dollars or just promoting communism or its variable version of socialism which will benefit themselves the most. In their opinion, there has to be an upper echelon akin to the politburo, which is just a copy that same upper echelon of greedy humans we have now as part of normal society. Yet these people make the claim to want to improve it. It is weird, The top 10 percent who own 80% want to make changes to do what ?

To be honest, I have absolutely no idea but I know it is not for the good of society as these people want to change it into something that has never been tested. These individuals are flat out trying to destroy the very same system that has made them the millions they have, must be reason to wonder..

The only match that I can see is that anyone associated with the global warming circus has the same sympathies with and about feminism. It seems to be the same mentality pushing and promoting it, the same people ploughing money into a doctrine they feel will benefit all. Instead it will instil the directly opposite effect wherein men will be cast back to the middle ages as far as our rights are concerned and just be increased slaves to the system..

To some this may be a stretch but there is more at work promoting and pushing the feminist agenda and we need to find out more about the people behind the scene, those people who hide behind anonymity, those faceless people who have always manipulated and managed the throngs, behind closed doors..

Posh Anti-Capitalism

The next time you’re forced to attend a dinner party, keep an eye out for the global warmer.  Then ask him what he thinks about supermarkets (wicked), ‘consumer society’ (soulless), world trade (cruel) and government regulation (more needed).  Global warmers are, in short, anti-capitalist.  But – and here’s the really important thing to understand – it’s a very specific form of anti-capitalism.  We might call it posh anti-capitalism.
In the old days, when there was less swearing on TV and kids were scared of policemen, anti-capitalism was coloured Red.   The Reds complained that capitalism would cause the ‘immiseration’ of the workers, and they dreamed of giant socialist factories, out-producing the West.
The tragedy (for the Reds) was that capitalism didn’t play ball.  Instead of getting poorer, ordinary folk got richer – much, much richer.  For the simple reason that capitalist mass production must necessarily go hand in hand with mass consumption.  What the new-leftists call ‘consumer society’.
But these days, anti-capitalists are coloured Green.  They campaign not in the name of the working class, but of ‘Earth’.  Instead of giant factories, they dream of little handicraft workshops and organic peasant farms.  They complain not that capitalism will impoverish the workers, but, on the contrary, that capitalism has made them too rich.  It is the very success of capitalism that seems to upset them.
Green guru James Lovelock says the overconsuming public is like a ‘revolting teenager’ and says we are ‘far too greedy and selfish for our own good.’  Green Party politician Caroline Lucas says we must ‘move away from endless consumerism and materialism.’ Green foodie Colin Tudge, condemns ‘the mindless accumulation of wealth for ill-defined purposes.’ John Naish, in his bookEnough, says we should be satisfied with what we have, ‘In the Western world we now have everything we could possibly need.  There is no ‘more’.’  To Oliver James, prosperity is a disease - he calls it the ‘Affluenza Virus’.  It’s all too much for celebrity journalist Rosie Boycott, ‘Stuff – in all its forms – fills the empty spaces inside, which materialism creates.’
It is more than ironic that the anti-consumption rant comes from people who are, by global standards, rolling in the stuff and from a superior social class. Take a look at Al Gore and Prince Charles, at Jonathon Porritt, the old Etonian friend of Prince Charles, son of Lord Porritt; or the old Etonian Baron Lord Peter Melchett, former head of Greenpeace, or Ecologist editor Zac Goldsmith, another old Etonian, son of the billionaire James Goldsmith, and nephew of yet another old Etonian the Green guru Edward Goldsmith; or ‘eco-warrior’ Mark Brown, who was acquitted of leading the ‘Carnival Against Capitalism’, who is a member of the fabulously wealthy Vestey family; or the founder of the Soil Association Lady Eve Balfour, daughter of the Earl of Balfour; or the author of the Global Warming Survival Handbook, David de Rothschild, and so on, and on.   Charles Secrett, former executive director of Friends of the Earth helpfully explains, ‘Among the aristocrats there is a sense of noblesse oblige … a feeling of stewardship towards the land.’
Brendan O’Neill says in The Guardian, ‘It is remarkable how many leading environmentalists come from wealthy or aristocratic backgrounds.’ And adds, ‘There is something irritating - actually, let's not beat around the bush - there is something monumentally infuriating about rich people telling the masses that they should live more meekly.’

Link.. 

Sums up the feminist mindset perfectly..

Plenty of discussion regarding an article posted on the GMP site( it supposed to be the Good Men Project but it's aimed more at "what women want"or in this case "What Feminists Want"). A site that has been turned upside down when site co-founder, a Mr Matlock, was hurled to the wolves when he dared to question one of feminism's much loved mantras (all men are rapists)..

How DARE he, how dare any man stand up for all men by disagreeing with anything feminist. That topic has already been exposed here on this site and I am basically tired of it to be honest. But it is always refreshing to witness a minutiae of change on what was originally just another male hating feminist propaganda site, disguised as something meaningful and honest. That ofcourse  would be an oxymoron as feminism and honesty should never be mentioned in the same sentence, let alone referred to it directly.

In the past, GMP had such notable vitriolic masturbators of the truth, as Jessica Valenti, Amanda Marcotte and ofcourse the ever loathed and detested Hugo "I am a mangina/ male feminist"Schwyzer and between the lot of them, they ensured the hate and vitriol was heaped in successive articles. It truly was a site to loathe and detest, as the total hypocrisy from that site was as plain as day. It really just demonstrated how hypocritical and dysfunctional the feminist movement and doctrine really is, but the ongoing denial was there none the less..

Neely Steinberg loves you, as long as you don’t love yourself

Paul Elam from AVfM



Along comes Neelie Steinberg, a well meaning relationship and dating columnists, to post an article about "20 Things I love About Men", apart from the lovely, cosy topic title, she explains how much she is tingled about the way men cater to herself specifically. Pedestal in place and with servitude policy in hand. Loved men for making "her" world complete without any reciprocation or even bothering with what women's responsibilities are in regards to that relationship. The entire article places her on the pedestal and all men serving obediently at her feet. That was primarily what she loved the most about men. They made her "feel" good and every segment on the list encompassed precisely why her admiration for men relied solely on, the fact that they are there to serve her and make her feel good and do all things for her , it borders on embarrassing and I'll ignore the narcism..

Here are the first ten..

I love when a man puts his hand on the small of a woman’s lower back, as if to say, I’m here for you if you need me.

I love when a man wipes away a woman’s tears or pushes a strand of her hair away from her face, tucking it lovingly behind her ear.

I love how millions of men go off to work every day and then come home after long work hours to share in the housework and child-rearing.

I love how men contribute hundreds of millions of dollars every year to charities in the U.S. and across the globe.

I love when a man makes us feel like women.

I love when a man waits patiently inside an elevator to let all the ladies out first.

I love how a man who would go to the ends of the earth for a woman he loves.

I love how a man who will rub his partner’s feet at the end of the day even though he’s had a hard day at work too.

I love the men who so bravely and willingly risk their lives in service to our country and to protect us all.

I love being Little Spoon.

In order to put things into perspective, we have an alternate version, we are for equality here even though feminists are not..

Don't even think about defending yourself as you will go to jail without question. Women can abuse at will.

What is that saying again, ask and shall receive, seek and you will find. Words of wisdom apparently as I posed something similar not that long ago about whether or not there are any women left on the planet who have any idea or can give any indication that they actually give a damn about what is going on. One continually wallows need deep in the usual "what women want/demand" as that has been the topic to ad nauseam for the last 40 odd years..

One wonders if anything else dares to break through that heightened wall of victimhood. But alas, we have a slight clearance in the fog as a request is forwarded for some input into issues apart from their own mountain of doom..

One does have to be carful whenever asking this question as the response may not be what one expects. Once the floodgates are opened there will be no closing them again.

My response to this question would simply be to direct the request here (the online compendium of Men's Issues)  . All or most of the issues are covered, it is still in the process of being updated as TDOM has stated. But it does give the gist of what is ailing society today and where the sexism, discrimination and bias really is..

So we have this request..

AW - Greetings and salutations, forum members!
A few disclaimers:1. I'm an American woman, but I'm not here to promote myself. I'm telling you to put my post in context.2. I don't want to pull focus from the issues. If you find my post disruptive, I'll take a hint from the silence and leave.3. This forum is primarily for men to exchange ideas, rant, and support one another. I've posted under "Opposing Views" out of respect for that mission, not to challenge it.4. These disclaimers aren't to paint myself as a good American woman; I just worry about not saying exactly what I mean. My apologies if it sounds tedious or self-promoting.
I'm not so much posting from an opposing view but a limited view. I appreciate men's plight, but I as a woman can never fully understand it. And since words don't do much, I want to actively address whatever sexism I see -- walk the walk, I suppose. Of course, there are probably thousands of little sexisms I don't pick up on. I can pay my half at meals, write letters advocating against false rape charges, etc -- but there's probably so many things I won't catch from my perspective.
So here's my question: aside from major issues like paternity fraud and women using sex as leverage, what small acts of misandry to you see regularly? And how can well-meaning women avoid them -- as girlfriends, sisters, coworkers, wives, etc? We can't make things equal, but we can still do our best to be fair.
You now have the floor. I greatly appreciate any and all contributions (and will understand if I receive none). 

Maybe a few of the followers or readers may like to express their opinion and respond to the question and I will update as we go along. Meanwhile, here are a few responses on that forum where the question was originally posed..

Opening Pandora's Box..

Man 1 - Seen any MacDonald's ads recently? 


AW - I haven't seen any McDonald's ads recently. Is one you're referring to available online? 

Man 2 -How about all the Progressive ads on TV with cute, lovable Flo and the men who come in her insurance store? They're always fat, balding, and wearing glasses except for one male character I saw. And they're always shown as either sexist, stupid, crazy or amazingly immature, while the female customers are always attractive and witty and mature. Think how feminists would react if it were the reverse.

Or how about the sit-coms on TV today which almost all follow the "Simpson's" formula, with the husband as totally incompetent and bumbling, cowardly, selfish and immature but their wives are intelligent and hard working, unselfish, etc.

Or the beer commercials, I forget the beer, where men go into a bar and are friendly with the pretty bar maid but she ridicules them mercilessly just because their pants aren't in style or they say the wrong thing. And they probably drink the wrong beer too.

And on and on. This is common is today's media. What effect does this have on young boys growing up today? How about news reports about a story where 20 male miners died in a tragic mine disaster? The reporters will never say it was 20 MEN who died. They'll say that 20 WORKERS died or that there were 20 VICTIMS of the disaster. But if there was one woman who got killed, all the reports would be "19 men and one woman killed". There's a great video about this on manwomanmyth.com, among many others that go into other topics, like how so many of the laws today are anti-male and pro-female, and how schools are biased against boys and toward girls. 

The most common ones I see on a regular basis:

1. The appropriation of men as "useful objects" to women who are either lazy or have no interest in performing certain duties if they can simply require men to do these things for them. The examples of this are countless, but are not limited to "borrowing" money from men (which, in my experience, is almost never paid back), commanding men to carry heavy shit, making jokes about responsbilities that they simply pass off to men (IE telling their girlfriends "that's what men are for"), asking men to fill their shifts at work for no intrinsic benefit/reward, and asking men to fix things that they broke instead of using google to figure it out themselves.

2. Creating false dichotomies involving polar opposites of men where neither extreme is viewed favorable - like the niceguy/badboy. Women tend to denigrate both of these parties even though they are loosely defined and highly pidgeonholed, despite the tendency for American women to be attracted toward the latter group. In other words, men are always viewed as guilty/flawed even when he fits the bill perfectly. This is some combination of paranoia/entitlement among women, but it is clearly evident because women try to take advantage of even those men who they perceive to be the most attractive.

3. Using legal/social leverage to manipulate men through false allegations (if you don't do XYZ for me then I'll report you for crime/offense ABC). While this is rarer than the above two embodiments of misandry, it is perhaps the most foul. Since men are presumed to be guilty when their accuser is a woman (who often employs other friends or fake witnesses to persecute the man) it can be extremely difficult for a man to beat. Your post implies that you are somewhat familiar with this already, so I'll leave it there.

4. Intentional emotional abuse of men for personal sense of power. Taunting, nagging, manipulation, teasing/controlling men with sex, suggesting competition from other men and implying superiority are all part of this. Most men in relationships can reiterate this better than I can.

I personally do not see an easy solution to these dynamics because many of them are enforced legally (IE promoting women to divorce a rich man because its a faster way to wealth than working through the corporate ladder) and can therefore profit from the objectification and disposal of men. If individual men and women decide to genuinely reject this sort of behavior, that is perhaps the best response without systemic changes. And it is precisely the focus of this particular forum. 

feminist Obama..

Obama and the group of feminist female assassins he placed in the White House will no doubt ensure his re-election is definitely not guaranteed. One is supposed to show some level of respect for leaders especially one in charge of a superpower nation. But one just cannot find the appropriate reasons or examples or character or dignity or honour that would normally demand respect. In this example, it appears to be totally and completely absent..
When Obama's hench-women introduced the new rules applicable to bonking into Colleges and Universities, where the onus of proof was placed on the accused and not the opposite way around, as has always been the case (innocent until proven guilty, you know, that one), they knew precisely what the consequences would be but all it did was demonstrate that ALL radical feminists want is to jail, kill or remove as many men from the planet as possible. If in doubt refer to Radfem Hub posts on this site)

Rape/sexual assault on Campus stats, someone had a look and guess what ?
Not 1 in 4 but..

One-in-One-Thousand-Eight-Hundred-Seventy-Seven

This way, they can stand back, for the cowards they are and claim innocence as well as achieving an outcome to a drama they have introduced themselves (the delusional claim that "women are being raped at a rate of 1-3,1-4,1-6", take a pick) and it's in plague proportions, but only in the minds of those feminists ofcourse. The one single factor that feminists failed to grasp is that they need to tell women they were raped, even though the so-called victims deny it themselves. The 1 in 4 proportions would actually mean that over 30 Million women would be raped, I mean really, .. Really. How can those delusional, blatant liars ever make that type of claim and then be rewarded by being placed in the White House ?

See what I mean about those re-election chances..

..And another issue that the politically correct universities have installed is starting to back them right where it hurts the most..

Marquette University Threatens Academic Freedom