Latest Posts
Showing posts with label feminist anti male bias. Show all posts
Showing posts with label feminist anti male bias. Show all posts

They Just Doesn't Gets It..

We are already past the fact that feminists have in every way possible ensured the denigration and humiliation of the term male, as it is now associated with all those negatives their nastiness have directed at it. Not only have they tried every which way to ensure the term man or male is poisoned, they have also tried to ensure that females refuse to adopt the husband's surname even though that same female had already inherited her Father's surname. How is that for stupidity and one that has been followed by quite a few blatantly hypocritical females and even some who do not claim to be members of that hate movement..

It is their mark of ignorance and a demonstration of following the feminist doctrine to a tea without ever realising how silly and ridiculous they appear. But that level and method of brain-rinsing is apparently lodged in history as we see TDOM explain. Stupidity is apparently not the pre-amble of the current cadre of feminists as that  habit was inherited centuries ago. One would have at least thought that one would learn and maybe realise that one had to grow up and smell the toxicity of the feminastie movement, however it would appear that that lesson was never absorbed and just ignored by all those "strong", "independent" women who claim independence while suckling the government funding teat..

They Doesn't Get It.

But He Does

English: One of the symbols of German Women's ...
For a long time I’ve been critical of the feminist argument that the use of “he” as a generic pronoun for both genders is an example of male privilege. In fact I’ve made just the opposite argument; it demonstrates the disposability and lack of value placed upon males and masculinity in our culture. This article All-Purpose Pronoun in the NY Times would appear to vindicate my position.
According to the article, the generic use of the masculine pronoun to apply to both genders can be traced back to a woman named Anne Fisher (1719-78) who publish “A New Grammar” in 1745. Mrs. (or should it be Ms.?) Fisher appears to have been, what in the modern vernacular we would call, a feminist. She authored a book on grammar, ran a school for girls, and (with her husband, Thomas Slack) operated a printing business and newspaper. Note that she even appears to have rejected taking her husband’s name.
Prior to Fisher’s book, it was popular for authors to use the plural pronoun “they” as a singular generic pronoun denoting both genders. It would appear that the characterization of the use of “he” as a gender-neutral pronoun as representative of patriarchal oppression is nothing more than another feminist distortion and misrepresentation of history.

Female violence, society’s “dirty little secret,”..



The feminist dream is to malign and destroy man's credibility by making all females victims, regardless of the situation, and ensure that all males are held to be aggressors even though that great lie is finally being exposed..

Feminists, especially radical feminists, a group of toxic lesbians, have been guiding legislation and laws to ensure those laws victimise men and boys for any reason they see fit. Lawmakers have deliberately turned the other cheek by passing those biased and sexist laws without scrutiny, thereby creating a victim class for women and allocating copious funding while at the same time ignoring services to benefit men and boys. This routine has been ongoing for the last 40 years as white knights and cowards in the legislator deny the existence of abusive women, which ofcourse, much to their amazement, do actually exist..

But not according to majority of mainstream politicians. They have betrayed their constituency, granted carte blanche arrangement to feminists to introduce laws and services for women, against men, at will..

This has to stop, your vote can and will count. It is time to assess what those politicians stand for and if they have demonstrated that they have passed those sexist, biased laws, boot them from office. They have to go..


Female violence society’s “dirty little secret,” especially in Alberta 
Beacon News | July 29, 2011 
By Christopher Walsh, 

Twenty years ago, a man named Earl was sitting alone in a mobile home, the oven door open, two propane tanks set on either side, when the phone rang. He wasn’t expecting the call, it just sort of came out of the blue as he readied to turn on the gas.

It was an acquaintance checking in to see how he was. It had been a tumultuous time. Forced to finally leave his wife and admit that he was the victim of female-perpetrated domestic violence was not an easy thing to do.
Not only was the issue not talked about, there were no support services to help men like Earl Silverman. He became a pariah, openly mocked and laughed at when he tried to explain his situation. Earl didn’t kill himself that day, but 20 years later, not a lot has changed.
“I’m still trying to find some services to help me deal with this experience and I can’t,” he says. “There’s nowhere I could go to talk about it. There’s an effort to ensure that the voice of male victims of domestic violence is not heard.
“They don’t want to admit that there’s a problem.”
While searching for support groups to help, Earl came to the conclusion that if the services weren’t there, he would try his best to provide them for other men. Twenty years ago, he began operating a helpline where men could call and talk to someone who understood and a couple years later, he opened the Men’s Alternative Safe House, or MASH 4077, to help men who experience female-perpetrated domestic violence.
“Sometimes part of the healing process is being a healer,” Earl says contemplatively. “Sometimes it isn’t.”
Although he has helped dozens of other men through the help line and safe house, he still hasn’t found the support he’s been looking for and has been unable to come to terms with the abuse he suffered. And while hearing back from men he’s helped over the years is fulfilling, it only goes so far.
“It does [feel good], for that moment,” Earl says. “Then I have to face the bias and all the other issues I typically face.”
Dr. Martin Fiebert, a professor of psychology at California State University, Long Beach, who has been studying the issue of female-perpetrated domestic violence on men since the mid-1990s, says the problem is only now beginning to be accepted by law enforcement and other social agencies.
“It’s one of those dirty secrets,” he says. “There was an entrenched mindset that developed and I would say, a feminist viewpoint, that always viewed men as the perpetrators.
“Female perpetration is a taboo topic. People have written about that and [it was] considered politically incorrect to discuss it.”
Fiebert says research funding agencies have tended not to provide grants to study the issue, journals have been reluctant to publish studies (in one case a researcher was threatened by the public, Fiebert says), a lot of talk around domestic violence is female-centered and female violence has traditionally been viewed as self-defence. But one of the biggest reasons for the silence around the issue is that a lot of men do not want to talk about it.
“Men have been victimized too, but what usually happens is that a man is ridiculed when he’s victimized; a woman is sympathized with,” Fiebert says. “People will laugh at men who are beaten up by their wives. That’s a pretty strong stigma.”

Scandinavia and the Feminist Miasma..

Sweden has probably been the best example of feminist governance and how obnoxious, sexist as well as discriminatory it can get. The blatant and obvious male hate generated by those lesbian feminists who have been imported to institute anti-male legislation for the Swedish/Scandinavian governments, has been unchallenged. One can guarantee the most rabid laws to be generated by those rabid feminist women as they have no issues whatsoever regarding equality, neither pretend that to be the case as well, it's female supremacy, period. What surprises me is the obvious lack of resistance from the males in those countries. What the hell are they doing apart from sitting on their hands and taking it full frontal..

Northern Europe: The Ideological Front Line?

by W.F. Price
Post image for Northern Europe: The Ideological Front Line?

The critical response to my article on Anglo Feminism, which suggested that feminism is nastier in Anglo societies than Scandinavia, was pleasantly instructive. Although I was aware that there was some dissent against the state feminism of Northern Europe, I did not know that it was so strongly felt. More importantly, I didn’t realize that feminism was such a crucial component of state ideology.
The picture that is emerging is one of a bureaucratically-entrenched soft totalitarianism in Scandinavia, as compared to a more lawless, rapacious and violent form of feminism in Anglo countries. Perhaps this is because in Scandinavia the state has been more successful in efforts to socialize feminism, thereby drawing support from society at large, whereas in the Anglosphere the burden falls most heavily on individual men who have exposed themselves to the risk of marriage or cohabitation.
Whatever the reasons, according to Henry Laasanen and other Finnish commenters, with a few exceptions, dissent against feminism is notably absent from the mainstream Scandinavian discourse.
Henry Laasanen:
In the USA you may grind teeth with radical “feminazi” writings. We have no feminazis (maybe one or two), which is – paradoxically – a catastrophe for the Finnish MRM: there are no critical discussions of equlity in the media, only feminist propaganda.
[...]
There are no feminist blogs (one inactive) or feminist columnists (other than official propaganda) in Finland. In the British newspapers Guardian and Daily Mail there are gender debates every week – we have no gender debates, because feminism holds the absolute “truth”.
Vortac:
…I think Finland is one of the world’s hardest countries to talk about men’s rights. In USA, it seems to be much easier, because there are so many more people, which means there are so many more MRA’s, and there is so much variance with all kinds of different states, different environments from mountainy places to plains and many things inbetween, that even men’s rights can be discussed seriously. Even when there is the expected ridicule, there are more people to rise against the ridicules, and challenge their viewpoints. In the little Finland, it’s a very difficult thing to do, and the consequences are less challenged – especially in the ‘real life’.
Finndistan, an (American?) expat living in Finland:
As a foreigner in Finland, following the finnish news in english, the media attack is impossible to avoid.
Articles on how the recession forces women back into the kitchen, articles on comparing all women and all men’s salaries not divided by occupation etc, articles on how men have more free time when the data clearly showed that men work more (from a survey spanning the ages 10-65), the president saying that the real victims of war and conflict are women and children, etc… In a small country, in the main news outlet, when these kinds of articles appear multiple times a week, its can get overwhelming, and with what Henri says, the consensus politics, it is impossible to show people that “Look, the survey showed men worked more. It is in the data”. Talking to a brick wall gets more response.
The atmosphere described in the above comments sounds like what one might find in an American gender studies classroom, but nowhere else. Family court may be hell for men in the US, but for the most part people have stopped cooking up ideological justifications to defend the strong-arm robbery that passes for “justice” in our courthouses. Instead, they simply say something like “bend over and take it like a man.” However, this is recent development, so perhaps Scandinavia is simply a few steps behind in this regard.
Because Scandinavia has traditionally been the testing ground for progressive policies, its societies have had a disproportionate impact on the Western world’s political discourse. This suggests that if men’s rights advocates gain some political traction in the Nordic nations, it could significantly raise the profile of the movement throughout the West.
Despite the awful political climate for MRAs in Finland, it looks as though there’s actually a lot of potential there. The frustration is palpable, and the thing about a consensus, we humans being what we are, is that it is made to be broken. Paradoxically, one of the advantages we Americans have in regards to speaking out about these issues is that so many of us men have very little to lose. When you’ve already been destroyed by your ex, denounced as an “abuser” or “monster,” and had your children and property seized, what more can they do?
Although it may not be that bad in Finland now, if the feminists continue to get their way, it will get worse. If I were a Finn, this is something I’d tell my fellow men. Point out how American law metastasized in the 90s with the passage of VAWA and the unholy feminist/conservative alliance. Stress the need to fight feminism before it takes things that far. I’m sure plenty of Anglo men would be willing to tell their own personal horror stories to Finnish MRAs, who could use them as an example of what feminism has the potential to do.
Given the remarkably strong position feminism has in Scandinavia, it looks like the perfect place to take a stand against the ideology which, despite its claims, is supremacist rather than egalitarian. In fact, this may be the single best argument for the egalitarian Scandinavians: feminism ultimately leads to a society that is anything but just and equal. Through its pursuit of radical equality of outcome, it undermines legal equality, and eventually will replace rule of law with rule by law, which would erase the distinction between Scandinavia and its eastern neighbors, and thereby destroy the distinct civilization of the North.

The Spearhead is a reader-supported site, so if you enjoy our content please consider a donation to keep us online now and in the future. Thank you, your support is appreciated.