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..

This is exactly what we have been saying all along and finally a confession straight from the horses mouth..

 "Radical feminists seek liberation from men and their system, not equality."

Read it for yourself. Male feminists are finished, not even feminists want them involved..

Finally a confession about the real intentions of feminists and their self confessed male hating stance and assigning that to ALL FEMINISTS..

Have a read as you finally comprehend what feminism is really all about..

Note to feminists - Try Denying the TRUTH now, Lying Hypocrites..

An Open Letter Regarding A Radical Profeminist and Other Would-Be Helpers”

This is an open letter about men who claim to be feminist and to the women who believe them. This letter is directed at women who — without any analysis or criteria — believe men who claim to be feminist. This letter is not directed at anybody else, so please ensure that you are indeed a member of the intended audience before replying. This letter has been written with the cooperation of 28 radical feminists, all of whom should be familiar to those who frequent radical feminist spaces. We are rather serious today, about a rather serious harm being committed with impunity.

First, you need to know why we have a valid reason for being concerned about the behavior of self-identified feminist men within feminist spaces, and our answer is simple: We have identified the subtle mechanisms utilized by pro-feminist men to “divide and conquer”, to erase the commonality from all women within feminist spaces and whose cumulative effect results in a gross marginalization of the radical feminist position. Nor are we are the only women to notice a problem. Megan Milanese brilliantly describes most of the tactics here — yet that list does not go far enough to analyze the extent of the problem.

So why should an erasure of the commonality inherent to all women matter to anyone besides radical feminists? Lucky Nickel makes the relevant connection for us.
Self-naming and self-identified labels mean nothing. There must be substance to the label they identify with and substance to who they claim to be. Otherwise folks can insist on calling a mouse a giraffe or claim rape is really love.
What I do think important to note is that liberals, lesbian separatists and radical feminists are all flying the radfem flag these days. The problem being, they are 3 separate and distinct political groups and ideologies, 2 of whom are inappropriately waving the radfem flag. It can get a bit tricky tho with lesbian separatists as radical feminists can also be lesbian separatists. But not all lesbians are radfems and not all radfems are lesbian separatists, or even lesbian for that matter. But in Julian Real’s case, that would be irrelevant. The dude is not a lesbian or radical feminist.

What the dude is, is liberal. And what he is attempting to do is appropriate the radical feminist label in order to inject liberal ideology. Equality politics are liberal politics, not radical feminist politics. Radical feminists seek liberation from men and their system, not equality. Liberals focus on differences between women. Radical feminists focus on the commonality of women. Needless to say, these 2 different ideologies conflict and clash. Which delights men like Julian Real to no end. Cuz if he keeps liberal women pitted against radical feminist women, it keeps women from unifying, which in turn keeps the heat off of pricks like him and men in general. Slick, no?[/indent]
In talking to each other privately, we have decided to collectively communicate the following message regarding Julian Real, Hugo Schwyzer, and other men like them who claim to be feminist allies. These men do not speak for women as well as we can speak for ourselves and we ask that you give radical feminist bloggers the respect of reading our words, joining the discussion in comments on our blogs, and contributing to our own community rather than giving energy to men like Julian & Hugo who seek to divide us on points which all feminists have in common. Men exhibiting these behaviors have inserted themselves into discussions among women when their participation was insidiously harmful in nature, and we ask that you not support that behavior nor make excuses for it.

The Daughters of Feminists wondering why they should be different, you know, shave legs and stuff..

Just to increase your education just a little more regarding those radical feminists. Have a look at this rather comical set of events that every female can look forward to, with their compliments ofcourse. It has always been the rad fem's dream to remove either every single male from the planet or just keep a few drones around for mating purposes, probably those ball-less male feminist wimps who would offer no resistance..

Undercover Punk aka Bess Hungerford - I have reservations about framing “revolution” as the natural or inevitable conclusion of radical feminist theorizing. It seems generally accepted that “revolution” will cause the total destruction of all existing social institutions because revolution is only means of eliminating the “root” of female oppression. Thoughts which support revolution are therefore “radical;” everything short of that is not-radical. Not-radical thinking has no place in “radical” feminism. I’ve been turning these assumptions over and over in my mind. The belief that female liberation through “revolution” is even possible leaves many unanswered questions for me.

For example, how do feminists propose that we destroy all social institutions? With physical force? I think violence is counter-productive to feminism, but let’s pretend that women can use violence as a means to a greater end without harming ourselves in the process. I will suspend disbelief and take as given that women have also been successful in destroying all the buildings and physical infrastructure men have ever built; that we have effectively destroyed all the historical records and organizational documents of patriarchy (and that no one is secretly harboring any of them).

Now bear in mind that we are looking at RadFem's version of being polite as this blog is indeed in public view, which indicates how they believe that the public is ready to be exposed to their lunatic rantings and behaviour..

The lunatic feminist by the name of Undecover Punk(blog link) is no other than Bess Hungerford, another member of that sadistic movement and member of the Radfem Hub forum..

Hungerford also has a Facebook page which shows all of the other revolutionaries who are all apparently ready to die for the cause as those radicals are poking and prodding the methods of eliminating half the earth's population, which will ofcourse take some major effort and I will leave you to ponder those missteps in their stupidity, to contemplate. A more lunatic bunch one would be hard to find. Matching even the KKK, but making it sound nice, just like being handed a mushroom and wondering whether you would survive eating it...

According to Agent Orange, here is it's facebook page..




So we have Undercover Punk exposed as Bess Hungerford and exposed with the level and type of psychopathic ramblings it promotes. What warms me up the most is the responses to this lunatic's ramblings, you know, like, like she actually has this really good idea and I am going to like help and stuff..

More Hungerford - So, how would women eliminate these residual subconscious biases? This is my primary reservation about revolution as liberation: human minds cannot be wiped clean of patriarchal ideas. Freeing women from the tangible constraints of patriarchal institutions is a noble cause, but revolutionary results will require us to transform ideology as well.

That appear to be the major problem where Hugerford is concerned. What they would really need would be one of those mind erasing gadgets, you know those, the one that girls keep discovering all the time. And here I am fixing their problems, again..

Sargasso Sea - How would we solve problems and distribute resources? I simply don’t have faith in human (read: female) “nature” to magically work-it-out.

Freeing women from the tangible constraints of patriarchal institutions is a noble cause, but revolutionary results will require us to transform ideology as well.

This is indeed getting trickier all the time. After murdering every man and boy on the planet, with the exemption of Hugo, Manboobs and Flood (been given their little room and a test tube), they would have to have a close look at each other apparently, as there may be some residual "patriarchal" thinkers among them and they might gum up the path to invoked Utopia, which is even further down the road than initially anticipated, like the next county..

I have another suggestion though, how about George Orwell's 1984, it could well supply the answer. They, the Matriarchy, could connect every, erm, erm, cave (with nice curtains) to the erm, erm, citizen broadband radio system as soon as someone reinvents it and have those propaganda sessions just like in the book..

Likewise and that’s why I like the idea of “Resolution”; it’s resolved, for instance, that a “revolution” would end with a whole lot of revolutionaries who still see through patriarchy-warped lenses.

It’s a resolution of each and every woman’s moral intellect we’re really after, I think. Then things could be really, really different. Maybe. I hope.

Ooh, Ooh, oh, I know, pick me, How about they just wipe out all those females who they think may or could possibly be or may some time in the future, think about that other "archy" and just take them outside and just shoot them as well. It should be easy as they have just wiped out them other Patriarchy members without blinking..

Easy peasy, problem solved..

....Will you stop helping them,.....idiot!!..

Radical feminists are the driving force behind the feminist movement. Those radicals as can be seen here, are the integral part of the promotion of that hate movement's activities against males, as they promote female superiority and supremacy, steer it's course. If there are still people in doubt, have a look at the link above and that will demonstrate precisely where those male loathers are at and are all about..

The "pretend" feminists of all colour, shapes and sizes, live in complete ignorance and denial about these radicals, their function in that hate movement. Those same "rosy" feminists still choose to claim that feminism is about equality without realising how rediculous they are spouting that dream. The Radical Feminists put the "nazy" into feminazy, giving it relevance and meaning..

Radical feminists demonstrate clearly why they are not even remotely interested in equality. If one has a look at any book or article produced by these radicals, you will never see any mention or resolvability or acceptability or even one single specific effort for equality, this is ofcourse not their intention, aim, goal or outcome. They demand and strive for supremacy at any cost and any price, as they know they are the not the one who is going to pay the price..

Below is a small list of these radicals at work in Australia at the moment, trying to introduce and have already in cases, manipulated legislation to ensure that women only benefit from any new laws introduced. This is how they work. They produce their own statistics, introduce false information via biased studies and peddle them off to politicians as real evidence. They ensure that if any politician, either male or female, does not toe their sickening timeframe and refuses to ensure their biased male hating legislation is passed, will be labeled as a women hater and or a misogynists, often both. That is the tactic they have used for years and it has worked well. The inject fear into anyone who dares go against their feminists zietgeist, in order to achieve their undeclared outcomes..

Another detailed list of the National Plan’s sources can be found here.

The Greater circle of Australian Radical Feminists
One little known portion of the website Radfemspeak.net, which is the site that hosts the Radfem forums, is a series of pages that they call ‘The Fury’.[10] The amount of information that is on The Fury is not large, but what is on there is very telling about Australian radical feminism and how the site’s members are connected outside of their small circle. On one of the pages, there is a list of names and short biographies, which the site considers to be radical feminists of note inside Australia. There list includes,Diane Bell, Susan Hawthorne, Sheila Jeffreys, Renate Klein, Jocelynne A. Scutt, Mary Lucille Sullivan, Denise Thompson, Bronwyn Winter and Betty McLellan.[11]

[10] http://radfemspeak.net/the-fury/
[11] http://radfemspeak.net/the-fury/aust-radfems.html

Two names come specifically to mind and that is Renate Klein and Susan Hawthorne. Two radical feminists who have already declared their membership to the inner chamber, the inner  of the hte chamber, a sanctum where all that hate generation, blossoms..

Here is an article by those two frauds..

Tankard Reist: Sugar would not even melt in her mouth..

The authentic feminism of Melinda Tankard Reist
Link..

As her publishers at Spinifex Press, Australia's only feminist publishing house (and secular), we take issue with these portrayals of Melinda Tankard Reist. It is easy to try to dismiss someone by smacking on a "fundamentalist" (whether Christian or Muslim, Hindu or Jewish) label and thereby dismiss the arguments that a person makes. What is less easy, but more ethical and intellectually rigorous, is to examine Tankard Reist's views - which are shared by many feminists and other advocates for social justice and human rights - and to see what the factual arguments for those views are.

Tankard-Reist, I am told is something else besides being one of them (being a conservative religious fundamentalist). That her principals and writing cannot be aligned with that hate movement's aims and goals. But you are judged by the company you keep and from the look of it, she has wallowed into the atrophying behaviour and thinking processes that those radicals find reason to comment about. Claiming that she is one of them and her efforts are in tone with their own thinking. I for one am not convinced that she is a blameless individual or an innocent bystander as she edits books for that feminist ( Even a cursory examination of her writings and the books she has edited for Spinifex Press) press as well as producing books on emotive topics and articles to ensure that she gets exposure and recognition. She has also chosen to take the same path as radicals by ensuring that her input is regarded and seen to push their male hating agenda, producing emotive information about the porn industries and prostitution, both of which will guarantee access to government subsidy and largesse. Radical feminists have used both those issues to germinate the male hating legislation that is now on the legislation books and designed solely benefit women only at the cost of men's basic human rights..

Never have any of these radicals ever considered any other point of view other than their own slanted, doctored purview, never would they ever have considered that a male prostitute or porn actor could be there due to coercion or force just like females may be (in most cases they have been demonstrated that they are not, but in it for the money or confess that 25% porn users are women) but that would never be considered..

Feminists were never about equality..

Tankard Reist could be a devils advocate but I am not going to go through her ponderings, her books and articles to find out and will leave it to others who already have. But her input has found it's way into the feminists hegemony database of malice and misinformation, for future use. You can if you like go to the radfemhub blog(link to download,top r/h corner) and load your mind with the vitriol and malice those radical feminists have produced and etch their poison into your mind for the rest of your life and wonder how easy women can take the low road and be influenced by something that is so distorted and incomprehensible as allow it to contaminate their action and words to such a degree.It will find them being loathsome and devoid of any humanity at all. That effort will change your own attitude towards the opposite sex, forever. Believe me, it is not worth the effort to be that sickened to the stomach by their verbal and mordant behaviour. Best to not want to know(in reference to the 250Mb Agent Orange download material on the RADFEM Hub R/H sidebar)..
But in the end, Tankard Reist has thrown her lot in with them and that is where she is and will stay unless convinced otherwise..

In order to get women into the Army, feminists decided to make claims about the "superiority" of women by claiming they feel less pain and are also able to withstand the heat better then men. Needless to say, the sycophants in the armed services complied, spreading those lies and therefore making way for women to join the army en masse.

They did have to change the application standards ofcourse as well as the exercise regimen as well as start up a "Baby Sitting Service", just to accommodate all those saintly females, those unstoppable killing machines. But that's besides the point ofcourse..

We had those lies printed in the "Newspaper of Record", the feminist controlled New York Times, to encourage females to die just like them men do, that was another farce ofcourse..

In a review of the records of veterans of the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, researchers at the Yale University School of Medicine and Veterans Affairs Connecticut Health Care System found that women were less likely than men to report any pain, 38.1 percent to 44 percent.

Several factors there were ignored in this study, but it was grist for the feminist mill in a push to have more body bags containing female parts and remains, than were showing up at the moment, it was the principle ofcourse. They also made that claim about the female soldier being far more efficient, periods and all..

Now we have those same lies countered and one would have to die of old age for any feminist to retract or even apologise for those lies but in order to do that, one would have to have some level of integrity or even a conscience. Both are devoid in feminists..

Now we have the precise opposite, actually we have the truth and another feminist lie exposed..

Study: Women feel pain more intensely than men.

Women experience pain more intensely than men, according to a U.S. study.

 The study, reported in the Journal of Pain, reports that women seeking medical care for a wide range of medical problems in the hospital or clinics at Stanford University School of Medicine reported higher pain intensity, on average, compared with men with the same diagnoses.

Women reported more intense pain in 14 of 47 disease categories, while men did not report more intense pain in any category, ABC News reported.

We all know where this is going. Now we will have the endless demands that women's pain has been ignored, more money will now have to be allocated to study that and women will now have to be  specifically assessed and a special drug will have to be invented so the poor dears will not suffer so much even though at the moment, they are the bigger medical drug users already. They are victims didn't you know..

From my personal experience over the years, they complain endlessly about anything remotely "painful", which would include a vast range of psychosomatic as well as "real" pain, they are human. I have seen them complain endlessly about a splinter in the finger. I mean, who actually really believed they could stand more pain to begin with. I do wish they would make up their minds as I am getting dizzy by this never ending claim of women being "superior" in every department then Men and over the years, each and every claim made by lying feminist have been relegated to the scrapheap. Amazing..

CDC: Women were more likely to use prescription drugs than men.

Now tell me how these lies that feminists have intendedly formulated, help women again?. We have radical feminists (mostly lesbians and the biggest bunch of violent abusers cannot be found) who go to extremes to claim how superior women are. They build them up just to tear them down, so who does that actually help. Certainly not the members of the opposite sex. Young female college students are endlessly dragged into those lies via "Women's/Gender Studies indoctrination classes che", just to find out later, if they feel like checking that out, only to discover they have been conned. Each sex has their own benefits and abilities and it has yet to be rationally proven that one is better than the other but radical feminists keep claiming it has been the case. Who knows where they get those lies from..

Feminist lies will inevitably cause more misery and suffering and for no benefit except keeping themselves in highly paid positions, so they can keep dishing out this level of tripe..

Women will pay in the end and it's already happening in more ways than one. It's about time they decided who their enemy really is..

Fraud in Australia’s plan to reduce violence against women

 What The Plan lacks in substantial comparative statistical data, it makes up for with hyperbolic references to various academic publications which they imply contain extremely compelling data. However, when direct statistical data is mentioned, it is at best an out-of-context use of very some basic data; and at worst a deliberate obfuscation of the full picture of domestic violence. Here is an example of one statistic The Plan mentions over and over again in several of its various publications: 

Violence in relationships remains high in our communities, and most would agree that unless the unequal power relations between women and men are more meaningfully addressed, the incidence will not change. Around one in three Australian women experience physical violence, and almost one in five experiences sexual violence over their lifetime.“[1-pg59]

What they don’t mention is this “1 in 3″ (or 29%) stat isn’t just domestic violence, or even violence men perpetrate against women – it’s all forms of violence women experience. Furthermore, it’s only violence that occurs after the age of 15, which we will examine in a later article, is yet another obfuscation of statistical data. The exact same data set from which the National Council used, shows that over 41% of Australian men experience violence in their lifetime’,(12% more than women)as men are much more likely to be the victims of violence than women.

• 29% (2,243,600) of women experienced physical assault
• 41% (3,031,800) of men experienced physical assault
• 17% (1,293,100) of women experienced sexual assault
• 4.8% (362,400) of men experienced sexual assault

• 4.7% (363,000) of women experienced physical violence
• 10% (779,800) of men experienced physical violence
• 1.6% (126,100) of women experienced sexual violence
• 0.6% (46,700) of men experienced sexual violence

• 79,500 men experienced physical assault by a female perpetrator
• 195,300 women experienced physical assault by a male perpetrator

“While a small proportion of men are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, the majority of people who experience this kind of violence are women in a home, at the hands of men they know. Men are more likely to be the victims of violence from strangers and in public, so different strategies are required to address these different types of violence.”[3-pg1]
        77% of men (60,900) who experienced physical assault by a female which occurred in a home
        64% of women (125,100) who experienced physical assault by a male which occurred in a home

Even if the ABS data is correct, which does not include abuse to children under the age of 15, who are abused at much higher rates by their mother than their father, men constituting one-third of all domestic abuse victims is not a “small proportion” in any sense of the meaning. In the prior 12 months to the survey for sexual assault, men experienced 27% of the incidents of sexual violence; again, not a “small proportion.” The question must be asked why a well funded government study on domestic violence doesn’t even begin to address the victimization of men when they do account for significant portion of domestic violence victims? According to the council:

“Enhanced community awareness and education programs are needed to change violence-supportive attitudes. These initiatives must be always based on the notion of gender equality and the need to shift men’s consciousness from one of privilege to one of mutuality. They need to make men question their own economic, social, and political power over women.“[1-pg47]

Does the National Council believe that the violence men endure is not as important as the violence women endure?

“Attitudes and beliefs about gender are learned, and society often teaches deeply held sexist views.  
Evidence shows that communities increase the risk of violence against women when they allow norms that support men’s controlling attitudes and behaviour over women, or attitudes that support the notion of male privilege. 

These norms include:”“macho” constructions of masculinityideas that “a woman’s place is in the home”notions that men should “wear the pants” as heads of the household and wage-earnersstandards that segregate male drinking and encourage excessive orbinge drinkingstandards that create peer pressure to conform to these ideas of masculinity and male behaviour[1-pg39]

These definitions of what it means to be a man are from Professor Michael Flood, a person who posed as a member of the father’s rights group Fathers4Equality, and used the groups resources unethically and fraudulently.  He sent distasteful and offensive letters to every member of the Australian federal parliament, in an effort to discredit and undermine the group’s efforts and reputation.[24][25][26] But more to the point, these stereotypes which Flood lists as the underlying cause of male violence are shallow and arguably paint an extremely biased and inaccurate picture of the vast variations of masculinity definitions that vary greatly from person to person. But let’s look at the basic statistics of men in Australia in terms of health, education and welfare when compared to women, to see the statistical evidence of “male privilege. 


Men Live on average 5 years less than women - (in 2007-2009 men had a 40.9% chance of surviving to age 85 years compared with women’s 57.3% chance)[20] 

Men accounted for 93% of workplace fatalities in Australia in 2009-2010[21] 

Men die of suicide at 3 times the rate of women ( 2008 Men 16 and women 5 per 100,000 population)[19] 

At least 1 in 3 victims of family or domestic violence is a Man[7] 

Men are more frequently victims of violent assault (3.9 %  man compared to 2.4 %  women)[7] 

Men are more frequently threatened with violent assault ( 5.0 %  men compared to 3.5% women)[7] 

Men’s enrollment in post secondary education for 2010 is 43.8%, women’s enrollment is at 56.2% [18] 

Men are more than twice as likely to be victims of homicide (1.8 victims per 100,000 population) than women (0.8 victims per 100,000 population)[22] 

The imprisonment rate for men in June 2009 was 13 times the rate for women(329 prisoners per 100,000 male adults versus 25 prisoners per 100,000 female adults)[23]

Men seem to be on the disadvantaged side of many basic areas of concern for any Australian citizen. It’s no secret that in the Western world, men have been falling behind for sometime now, which many would argue is due in large part to the emphasis on placing the needs of women above men. Moreover, the entire premise of this National Council’s Plan is predicated on the belief that men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators of domestic violence. Their own data refutes that claim, and furthermore, several significant studies have been done that show domestic violence is perpetrated equally between men and women. [15][16][17] The statistics of domestic violence from the United States, Canada and United Kingdom shows domestic violence is perpetrated equally between men and women. 

(There is additional information that has not been released yet, which will show an attempt by several employees of the AIWH and ABS to change, hide or ignore data relating to domestic violence towards men and children.) 

Since the main underlying argument for such an enormous government undertaking is faulty, misleading and in many cases dishonest, what are the real motivations for the study and its findings? After close examination of the National Council’s drastic recommendations of  judicial and legislative changes, which call for ‘gendered civil and criminal laws’ meant to enact a type of gender profiling against men, holding them to a lower standard of proof for incidents of domestic violence and sexual assault, one can only wonder how such a biased and bigoted study made it past the desks of some of Australia’s most prominent politicians without any protest.

I think many Australian men may be curious to ask if Prime Minister Julia Gillard knows the real facts about domestic violence and sexual assault, and if she is aware of the horrendous amounts of civil rights violations, against half their population, that the National Council’s plan so adamantly call for.  Sadly, it now appears that hatred and bigotry are becoming government policy in Australia 

References

(1)The Planhttp://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/women/pubs/violence/np_time_for_action/national_plan/Pages/default.aspx

When one reads something like this, you could be excused for thinking that it's not really true. How can this be in this day and age when everyone is so enlightened. Human rights is instituted, surely, in law. The bad old days of fascism and witch hunts have been relegated to history as a joke. We now have legal rights as human beings to go about our own business and to live a life free of tyranny and injustice, surely..

 Apparently not. The forces at work in Canberra are not a force of consisting of a group of people who are looking to enhance our lives but to destroy it. Radical feminists have already demonstrated what their end goal is and now we are seeing those same people that we exposed on the RADFEM HUB, who are directly linked to the Australian Government, introducing laws that will not only create disharmony but bias and hate. The reality of all these recommended laws are indeed mind boggling and we have only just starting to poke and prod it's reality..

 Those radical feminists will, if they are not stopped, introduce laws that are so archaic and debilitating as to make George Orwell's book "1984" appear be a normal everyday event. This is not tyranny as we have witnessed in the past, it's apartheid between the sexes in the very worst degree..

Wait until the facts are released as at the moment, if we were to introduce them, it would just be too much to take in. This is only the beginning..

Australia launches “The Plan” and the end to civil rights