Latest Posts
Showing posts with label feminist male hate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label feminist male hate. Show all posts



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 ground-breaking advert can be seen at a bus stop on Oxford StreetThe 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

Interactive advert  
The interactive screen will show the full 40-second advertisement only to women
An interactive hoarding at a London bus stop aims to show a 40-second advertisement only to women and girls.
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.

Some would have to wonder if Fidelbogen's request for the "roaring" from women request will ever eventuate, call me cynical but I have never seen it nor would I expect it. When women can sit in a television audience and laugh along with the likes of Sharon Osbourne about some lunatic cutting off a man's penis then one has to wonder if there is any level of humanity left in them at all..

Feminists have hit on two of their favourite topics - One, is the prostitution angle, where free women go about selling sex for money as is their majority wish, easy money for minimal effort on their part. Secondly, the radical feminist introduced the "Slutwalk" response because a man told women not to dress like sluts, take some responsibility for your behaviour, the sensible women do anyway. So it is not a problem of it being good advise, the issue was that feminists found another opportunity to malign and generate hate against men. Regardless of the fact that a majority of men do not use prostitutes as a majority are married, not that it makes much difference, ask Bettina Arndt. What amazes me about the entire topic of prostitutes and slutwalks is that it can all to traced back to women and their behaviour  being the culprits, but don't mention any of that as it appears to be irrelevant. Waiting for feminists to be honest will never happen..




More Proof That Feminism is a Social Cancer



Here we are treated to the famous anti-porn feminist Gail Dines on a talk show. And if you don't savvy what's wrong with this blabbering diarrhea-mouth, who fills the air with lies and won't shut up for even one second, then you are either willfully obtuse or rectal-cranially conjuncted. Do I really need to explain what is EVIL about this? If you cannot instantly comprehend the poignancy of the crisis here, then you are frankly beyond hope and I haven't got the patience to deal with you. So please go away. Now.

Gail Dines is not what's generally called a "radical" feminist. She is not a person of the so-called fringe. She is a mainstream activist, and people like her are painfully common. They yak it up on talk shows, they write glossy books that get reviewed by glossy critics, and they have a large following of uncritical sponges who sop up every word they say. Nobody -- especially not men -- will publicly stand up to these people and administer the verbal bitch-slapping they so desperately need. Pretty much the only ones who will tackle that unpopular job, are the "creepy" men who populate obscure websites.These men call attention to creepy things, and that makes them "creepy".

As feminism goes, Gail Dines is standard fare -- although I grant you she is worse than many. In olden days of rough village justice she'd have gotten the scold's bridle, or the the ducking stool, or the stocks. And quite right. Half the women in the village would have been throwing rotten garbage at her too, back in those days. But nowadays . . . women in critical numbers are eerily silent. And I won't try to explain that, especially considering that men are equally silent.

I realize that Gail Dines is ostensibly "not as bad" as the radfems who hide in private forums and talk about male genocide. No, Gail does not talk about male genocide (although it is an open question whether she entertains the thought), but that only makes her somewhat less poisonous. Two drops of cyanide in a glass of water as opposed to three, let us say. Aye, her demonic hatred of men is painted in blazing colors for all to behold.

I should add, that in my opinion Sharon Osbourne -- who thought it was "quite fabulous" when a man got his penis cut off -- is somewhat less poisonous than Gail Dines. And I would say the same of the female audience on Sharon's TV show, the ones who tittered uproariously about the incident. Overall, they are somewhat less poisonous than Gail Dines, and I don't doubt they would be totally creeped out if they knew about the radfems in the private form. And I'm sure it is a great relief to know that they would feel this way, even while they were tittering uproariously about the man who got his whacker whacked off.

And I am certain that Sharon and most of her female audience would assure us that those feminists in the private radfem forum are only "fringe radicals", that not all feminists are like that, and that certainly not all women are like that.

Here is a thought experiment for you. How if all hatred of men -- and all social proclivity to be silent about such -- were all at once to vanish from the world? Do you seriously believe that this thing we call "feminism" would continue to exist for even five minutes?

A concluding thought. Although it is deadly clear to me that all feminists are indeed "like that", I still refuse believe that all women are like that -- although a painfully large number are! Call me a fool, call me a Simple Simon, but I still think the majority of women are fundamentally decent, honest people. And I really think they need to find their voice. I really do.

I want to hear them roar.

It is urgently important for this to happen. The future depends on it.

The feminist mentality
I did have a laugh when I read this comment from Demosthenes -
And the first step is putting paid to the quaint notion that the answer to men’s rights is “more feminism.” That’s like saying the answer to lung cancer are more cigarettes. 
It is what we have been saying all along. Men need feminism like a bull needs boobs. It is just not a good match as feminists blindly try to steer masculinity into a congealed sphere while they take turns to beat the shit out of it and leave it useless and only a semblance of it's originality. Feminists claims have always been either to ensure that men are compliant to their wishes or be trained into cowtowing(sic) to women regardless of the situation..

While they have been busy trying to destroy masculinity, education and work environments, they have forced the opposite sex into working longer by foregoing their own needs and requirements and women have fallen for it, hook, line and high heels. Their endless poking and prodding by the likes of female feminist like Hymowitz has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to do with making a man a man. There interpretations is about as positive as feminists efforts were to increase their dwindling market share and acceptability, which has died to such a degree that they cannot even attract younger females to their functions and thereby loosing out on their much needed credit..

Feminism is basically history, only they refuse to accept that while they grapple with every issue possible to try and stay relevant. We have even witnessed ex feminists coming out of their misandric closet to declare that they are sick to death of their male bashing, male hating doctrine and will no longer abide by their nonsensical and often ridiculous methodology that they determine to be a normal discussion or debate. There version of a debate is for everyone else to listen while they talk, it can be referred to as the "Marcotte Syndrome" the "you listen while I talk method but don't disagree with anything I say or you will be regarded as the enemy. When feminists learn to mind their own damn business and stick to female issues which is what fem-ism is supposed to be all about. Basically who gave them the right to interfere with anything male and why are we even conversing with those clowns whose only wish is the destruction of all things male and replace it with a placebo. They can butt out of the conversation, so the boys can take care of it their own way which has already started to take place..





So feminism and feminists can just F*ck off and leave these important discussion to the grownups, the men..

Feminist Concerns With Male Self-Evaluation or Brothers Gonna Work It Out

by DEMOSTHENES XXI on DECEMBER 27, 2011
One of the major “hot-button” topics in the gender dialogs is how men are changing in the 21st Century or what some people refer to as “the New Masculinity.” This can be defined as an alternative or future set of male or masculine values in Western society that are meant to deviate or separate themselves from historical and/or traditional male or masculine values. The “old or traditional masculinity” is often defined by feminists as one that has been destructive and/or harmful toward modern society in general and women and children in particular. The one facet of this discussion that has been in particular focus is how men are rejecting the traditional gender roles and dropping out of the societal expectations that have “defined” masculinity.
As many people who follow MRA dialogs may have noticed, social discussions of gender roles and “so-called” masculine values are secondary to the mainstream MRA debates of legal inequality. However, it stands to reason that we take up that angle of discussion, especially because of the recent attacks against men based on many of us (especially our younger brothers) rejecting their traditional roles as family providers and even rejecting the concept of the traditional family. In light of the current economic and social changes in the western (US in particular) gender arena, the fate of the “New Masculinity” is of major interest to feminists of all stripes and if we wish to remain relevant in our own future, it should be of major interest to us as well.
When women began to reject their historical roles in the “traditional family,” it was lauded as a progressive step forward for women and equality.But when men began to do likewise, suddenly it is being framed as another way that men are hurting women. Feminism is touting itself as being the gatekeeper of gender re-examination for both sexes and quite a bit of evidence demonstrates that there is a significant opposition against men taking the same steps toward rediscovery that women did — especially without feminist supervision. You always read about feminists seeking to eliminate the gender roles that bind both men and women. You would probably expect that they would celebrate that men are seeking paths beyond traditional gender roles. But as the two articles show, that is anything but the case.
I posit that the above articles illustrate and typify a significant feminist viewpoint about men reexamining and redefining their idea of masculinity, as well as rejecting the traditional feminine expectations. And what these articles and others like them show is that feminists like Hymowitz, Marcotte, and others (including male feminists like Jackson Katz and Hugo Schwyzer) don’t like it one bit. And thus the true motivations of a significant number of feminists (second wave and beyond) are revealed. Their “feminism” was a movement meant to redefine the conventions of gender in favor of women. According to their feminism, the political and social changes that were being implemented were meant for women to better themselves.
However, the needs of men were not considered with those broadly-wrought changes in Western society and even now, male concerns and needs are an afterthought by those who continue to advance and maintain those changes. Furthermore, as these two and many, many, other similar articles by like-minded feminist thinkers suggest, the considerations and needs of men are still only second to the considerations and needs of women. But now that men are doing the same thing, it is a huge problem…for women. Like the women in the 70s, men do not want to become “family providers” or even engage in the act of creating families. Furthermore, they do not wish to embrace the historical roles that men have held in human society. They seek to look to their own interests and learn to enjoy life outside of the occupational “rat race” which has been the traditional direction of western men. But worse yet, those men who still choose to follow that traditional path have found more and more economic, legal, and social roadblocks preventing them from doing so. Despite the issues regarding the changes that men have lately experienced with economics, mental, physical, and social health, the primary motivation for these recent articles which examine these problems with men “dropping out” of society and becoming unemployed and uneducated, is how these issues affect women.
Still don’t believe me about feminists getting riled up when men start asking the “wrong questions?” Scoot on over to the Good Men Project and holler at founder, Tom Matlack. His former feminist “allies” have collectively like a wounded piranha because of a conversation he had with them (Marcotte, Harding, Ponzer, Schwyzer, among others…including the culturally irrelevant Rosanne Barr) regarding a simple question he asked: “Why can’t women accept men for who they really are? Is a good man more like a woman or more truly masculine?
This whole situation is telling of one truism: male feminist allies are welcome as long as they are useful and they know their place. Tom Matlack got a little too cozy with his so-called equity feminist friends, forgot himself, and the result has been an ugly mess over on the GMP. Matlack and his CEO, Lisa Hickey have been doing everything they can to try to salvage the incessant slamming that GMP has been getting by the feminist sphere. If they would listen to me, I would tell them to grab their collective cojones, weather the storm, and stand by their convictions. But I expect that they will do anything but….
More and more of the public perception of men is colored in a far less favorable light than in the past. Commercials show men as hopeless buffoons or cruel-hearted hecklers. Fewer and fewer “relationship movies” paint males in an equally elegant light as their female co-stars. However, some directors are breaking away from that stereotype and showing more realistic men. Men like Judd Apatow (who Ms Hymowicz also mentions in her above article), Greg Mottola, and Seth Rogen, have made a career of lampooning the “new masculinity.” But these movies make a point of showing their male foils moving past their personal flaws and at the same time, embracing their own maleness in a manner that eventually showcases in good faith the men that they truly are. In short, these filmmakers are using their movies to examine masculine values and viewpoints outside of feminist oversight and therefore, certain feminists (like the ones I mentioned) choose to take issue with these movies.
What this all reveals is that there is a problem within feminism with men trying to achieve awareness and transcend the historical limitations placed upon our gender. While there are feminists out there who probably do not agree with what is being done to men in their movement’s name, until they finally gain the courage to speak up and do something about their misandrist colleagues, they are equally complicit in this act of blatant marginalization.
However there is something else that all of this is saying: we are becoming effective enough to worry many of these feminists to the point where they are actively working to try to deter us from seeking our own enlightenment outside of the feminist paradigm. More and more men are seeking out their own paths to transcending the traditional bindings that have been placed upon us and that many of these feminists are trying to keep on us.
And finally we get to the title of this article. With the coming of the New Year, men need to find a way to sort out the mess that masculinity has become. And the first step is putting paid to the quaint notion that the answer to men’s rights is “more feminism.” That’s like saying the answer to lung cancer are more cigarettes. All of us as “brothers” need to work it out; we need to get ourselves together and solve the problems surrounding our gender. We need to seek out those people who are asking those questions and work with them to find the answers. We need to support each other as men and males. We need to be mentors to our boys, brothers to our fellow men of all creeds and colors, and most importantly, we need to be willing to embrace the newly emerging modes of masculine life. And more importantly, we need to do it before the feminists do it for us.
We can do this…as men and as brothers.
Like the song by the late Willie Hutch says: “Brothers gonna work it out! Brothers gonna work it out!”