MGTOW poses the ultimate threat to feminism: that feminism’s abusive, sexist, hate-filled agenda might be defused or neutralized by simply turning one’s back to it, walking away, and refusing to engage in the spheres where feminism operates its oppressive regime. Having gained astonishing political power by weaponizing victimhood, they now want to pull off the ultimate intellectual fraud: men are victimizing women by desiring them; or else they’re victimizing women by ignoring them. Way to have your cake and eat it, too! Why should we be surprised? Feminism has always relied on hypocrisy to achieve its goals and the institutions that give it power don’t seem inclined to put an end to it.
MGTOW is a rational response to being attacked, similar to the way white males have become more right wing overall. These leftist activists have spent decades demonising straight white males, then they act surprised and offended when the targeted group turns away from them. What a joke.
My only surprise is that far more men don't turn away in disgust and self-preservation. It testifies to men's enormous hopefulness, resilience, interest in or enthrallment to women (in some cases), and principled commitment to doing their part that they continue to accept their state-sanctioned enslavement. I feel a combination of admiration and impatience in thinking of it.
I think it is easy to forget that across swathes of the population people live remarkably traditional lives, and those who dont, aspire to live in much that way. I see some differences in the "post industrial " city I live in. Mainly in younger families both having to work full time rather than the preferred "one and a half " that held away for decades. However there is little confusion about what gender roles should be and that males are providers and child and home are feminine. Now in the University areas and fashionable "professionals" suburbs it's different. But in a working class city the main impact of feminism is felt when people have to deal with officialdom, generally for most that is relatively rare. Which is why I guess our political elite hate the working class, even the party which was founded to support working men and women.
I think that people men and women are genuinely surprised by the sorts things that they discover if they do have to deal with any branch of officialdom.
I no longer admire men who go along with it but in defence of some of them, they don't know any better. After all, the propaganda worked on me for a while too, until I eventually learned to see through it.
"Cowardice" it's a conundrum. For the very acme of "cowardice" in my social circles is any "attack" on women and children. By a man. The cleverness of feminists has been to ever widen what is seen as an "attack" on women and children. On the traditional level this sort of thing included not putting women and children first, not being a good provider, etc. All of which of course remains the exact same but now with added forms of horrors such as not cheering on women's footballers or not stumping up money for any number of women's causes or even suggesting "due process" for Male defendants. Just as mother Pankhurst handed out white feathers in the modern world there are a shed load of ways men can be labelled "cowards" if they don't tow the line. After all the animus against MGTOW is really that they are cowardly ducking out of their moral responsibility to support women and children. For what could be more cowardly than just "looking after no. 1" ? The clever manipulation of shaming men has to be one of the huge successes of feminism. After all when in Germany and Sweden an influx of people from a very different culture led to "harrassment" feminists there didn't say women should use their "power" and see off the upstarts, no they berated German and Swedish men for not seeing off these pests. And no doubt a parade of policemen and politicians were suitably shamed for not manning up sufficiently.
Piers Morgan's latest interview with Andrew Tate was revealing, I thought. Morgan was unrelenting. He wanted to Tate to admit and apologize for his statement that 19 year old women are more attractive than 26 year old women. In Morgan's view this was unacceptable misogyny. He kept prodding Tate over and over, "just say, yes I said that, it was wrong, and I apologize". Tate, to his credit, disputed that the remark was misogynistic, and refused to apologize. Funny how all the blatant misandry which you cite in this essay never even shows up on the radar of male feminists like Piers Morgan.
I found that intriguing, Morgan saying that having a sexual preference for females of a certain age is Misogyny, but when women have a sexual preference it is empowerment.
For evidence of the relative attractiveness of women age 19 versus age 26, just look at the ages of contestants in beauty contests (at least prior to woke additions of men in drag) and the career peaks of most actresses.
The civil, civilized liberal society that we were working toward has now turned into a hate-filled and hateful uncivil, illiberal society. Feminism with their neo-Marxist class conflict view of society were the font of hate, well documented by Janice, hate now taken up by "anti-racist" anti-whites and LGBTQ2S activists and groomers. Add to all that ugliness the upsurge in antisemitism, Jews now being imaginatively redefined as "privileged." The "justice" system has joined with a high tolerance for crime and criminals. The attack on prosperity in the name of "climate justice" will leave us poor as well as hated. It is all too horrible. Hobbes was right: where there is a war of all against all, civilization is not possible.
The double standards are exhausting. One example, women demand men to be in their traditional masculinity while they do not want to be traditional themselves.
Feminism has always been this way. Feminists want all the perks they see men getting - while ignoring the responsibilities men shoulder. Feminists decry the idea that women should have any responsibilities to anyone else, and want everyone to ignore them wanting everyone to not notice them hanging onto the perks traditionally accorded to ladies.
What is the difference between a spoiled child and a radical feminist?
A spoiled child whose will is thwarted will cry, "I HATE YOU!!"
A feminist whose will is thwarted will cry, " YOU HATE ALL WOMEN!!"
At least the spoiled child is more honest.
So feminism is determined to show that it is a movement of spoiled children who react only emotionally, devoid of principle and who project their hatred onto others.
They who profess to hate sex stereotyping act according to the ancient stereotype of women as hysterics driven by emotion. (I would say NAWALT) And when i noticed this and other double standards in 2017, my own 40 year long feminism dissolved
so of course MGTOW , who actually give feminists what they say they want, ie no interference by men in their lives will still hear the cry "I HATE YOU!!" which as I hope to have shown is what is really meant buy the cry "you hate all women"
I mean, who would want to deal with an irrational child who wants her whims catered to regardless of how they change and will still blame men for continuing to be discontent?
To those who say such a view is a caricature of feminism, as I was told just the other night, I would answer that they do not know feminist theory.
Thanks, Ms Fiamengo for reminding us of said feminist theory
One could be mistaken thinking Janice had written about the situation here in Australia, which is purportedly the world's most misandristric country and ranked 9th "Best countries for women" in 2022 (Canada was 6th in the usnews.com post).
After my experiance in our misandristic family courts that cost me my family, my home, my job and mental and physical health, I'm definitely MGTOW and contentedly happy to be so.
Feminism is coercive control. Perpetrators of coercive control do not like their victims escaping their control. MGTOW is escape for men, hence feminist ire is automatic. The feminist war against male-to-female trans has the same basis.
As well as the MGTOW 'phenomenon' as an adult, non-violent, self-preserving way for men to deal with Feminists and those who hate men, males, masculinity and associated constructs, we men also need to implement a second phase - that of supporting one another... females will undermine each other, steal boyfriends and husbands from each other, and they compete in so many ways with each other, from hair, clothes, social status etc. If all (most, at least) men were to genuinely support other men - ideally with a brotherhood creed and universal understanding of the role and challenges of a man in 'modern' society, we could be immensely more powerful - not for the sake of power, but as a mental health thing. If we could be rid of simps, beta orbiters, those in the friend zone - if we could inform other men thinking of getting married, if we could help those falsely accused... if we could un-indoctrinate male feminists (hint, they will never get laid claiming to be a feminist), if we vote with our wallets, and at the ballot boxes - if we refuse to be screamed at and ridiculed, to be cast as guilty for nothing more than our chromosomes... if we turn our backs on the hysterics, and if we help the fatherless generation who don't know how to be, or what it means to be, an adult man - then we become powerful.
I think of that Simpsons episode (yeah, I know, a horrible show from a male perspective for so many reasons) where the business mascots, when ignored, lose their power... monk mode, denial of our services to society and a supportive culture for and by men is what is required, He are better than they think / claim - we can show ourselves to be the adults in society, the responsible gender and soon, the craziness will dissipate and we can deal with some of the bigger issues we all face...
Thomas Ellis wrote the Rantings of a Single Male, in his book his partner who identifies as a feminist rewards him when he gets it right. The is a reflection of what Esther Vilar had previously written about in particular "The Manipulated Man" which as a side note was banned from sale on Amazon for a short period of time.
Good article. Several years ago I came to the conclusion that MGTOW is a consciousness and it's not that we reject the company of women so much as we withdraw our sanction of the victim. I did a video about that, MGTOW Consciousness. And personally I take the view that for rational women the rational response to MGTOW is WGTOW, because women should revoke their sanction of the victim, too.
From 2002 to 2012 I was a member of the Cowlitz Indian Tribal Council, but resigned in protest when several women on council attacked me and demanded my removal for protesting a sexist anti-male poster. Several years later my best friend, who died in May of this year after being vaxxxed 4 times, persuaded me to run and I was elected in a landslide in 2020.
I bring this up because two of the women on council, immediately following the death of my best friend, who was our tribal chairman, began attacking our new tribal chairwoman and as I defended her they dredged up my library of YouTube videos to accuse me of misogyny.
They've riled up the handful of Progressives in our tribe to demand my removal, and a few weeks ago one of them got a Temporary Protection Order against me after I, in reply to an email she sent to me and the others on tribal council, sent her the link to my MGTOW Consciousness video in which I quoted Turd Flinging Monkey as saying MGTOW (those of us in the Acceptance stage of the grieving process) are better able to love women than anybody else.
The hearing was 10 days ago and the judge dismissed her complaint.
Although we have a reservation, few of our members are reservation Indians. Most of us grew up out in the world and most of the time live like most other Americans, though we still retain some traditional practices. The member who got the TPO against me has a PhD in Psychology while when I graduated from the University of Washington in 1981 I had more than 270 quarter credits. So we're not stereotypical Indians.
But maybe we should be. Most indigenous Americans are classified as White or Black or Asian because they're considered "part-Indian." If American Indians were counted the same way as Black Americans, I suspect that in the US we would account for 60 million or more, but that would be inconvenient for the Progressives, who claim America is a racist nation.
More recently, just a couple days ago, The Suffolk Times published an article in which a young member who has a useless degree was quoted as saying our tribe rejects Capitalism. I reached out to them to correct the lie, and suggested they contact our tribal chairwoman. We'll see what they do.
As for the Progressives trying to get me removed from council for my reality-based views, I've been attacked so many times by Progressives that I find them irritating, and I will be sure to keep this article in my back pocket to share with our entire membership should their effort to remove me result in a recall hearing.
Did you know that complaining against a female health professional is criminal harassment in Toronto? Toronto Police will even tell you that you should withdraw your complaint!
My mother saw a female psychiatrist for decades. The psychiatrist prescribed my mother a controlled substance that has no connection with her condition. My mother was a schizophrenic. A full blown classic case that passed all the tests of a first year phycology course. She claimed to hear a voice in static that was a deity giving her super powers. Her case even passes the culturally inappropriate test for schizophrenia i.e. a Christian who believes while praying in a church that they hear the voice of god fails the schizophrenia test because it culturally appropriate for Christians to hear god while praying in a church however hearing the voice of god in static passes the schizophrenia test because its culturally inappropriate. The female psychiatrist prescribed my mother dextroamphetamine and had her on it for over 15 years. Dextroamphetamine is a controlled substance that is only ever prescribed for two conditions neither of which my mother has even a remote symptom.
I complained to both the Canadian college of physicians and the OPP but nothing was ever done.
I banged my hand once and couldn't move my finger so I went into the emergency room at a hospital in Ontario. I didn't really hurt but I couldn't move the distal phalanx. There was a female emergency room physician on duty. She ordered x-rays then started prodding my finger and squishing it. All of a sudden a shooting, intense pain shot through my whole arm. She looked kind of puzzled and kept poking away at my finger. Then she got the x-rays and jumped back in surprise and withdrew both her hands right away. I ended up needing surgery to repair the tendon in my finger and they had to cut open my whole finger and put in a titanium screw. The women doctor screwed up big time. She shouldn't have started playing with my finger until she saw the x-ray. She caused me further injury.
Then 2 days after the surgery I get called into the hospital. This 30 something female surgeon comes bounding and giggling into the examination room and starts taking off my bandages and then in a goofy sing-song voice says "I don't know what I'm doing". I just snapped at her and shouted. "What the hell do you mean you don't know what you're doing!". She ran out of the room and this middle aged nurse comes into the room and with a scowl on her house tells me to leave the room. Neither one would put the bandages back on. Finally they got a hold of the head surgeon. It was an administrative error. They had scheduled my for the pre-surgery consolation again. Legally the female surgeon committed a criminal offence but nothing ever happened to her.
I haven't seen in any of your videos an explanation for why feminism has been so successful and what can be done to stop it. As far as I can tell at some point in the mid 19th century one group of white guys in power decided they could weaponize "penis envy" against their political opponents. But it's like using a biological weapon. Sure it may initially wipe out your enemy but then it quickly mutates and exterminates all human life on Earth.
Also Poilievre should have simply stated that they did nothing wrong in including the tags and that Incels and MGTOW are not misogynists. Clearly Incels do not hate women. They want the government to provide them with wives (although I after they did they would soon be lobbying the government to take the wives away :).
It doesn't matter how bad Trudeau is, if Poilievre splits the right he won't win. If he doesn't join with PPC, he will just have a repeat of the last election in which PPC took enough votes for Conservatives to loose. Doing things like alienating MGTOW, going to Ukraine rallies with the uniparty, being pro immigration are going to leave conservative voters who vote PPC voting PPC because those are some of the major issue that the PPC addresses. He's just making the same mistake to last leader did trying to court the liberal voters who will never vote for him anyway. He doesn't have a chance of getting voters who vote liberal or NDP to vote Conservative. They vote based on ideology not on issues. The votes he can win are the PPC votes.
Trudeau in contrast, despite having absolutely no populist appeal and being extremely unpopular, has been able to garner an immense amount of political will--much more than any Canadian Prime Minister in recent history. He has his minority government unquestionably propped up by the NDP for the next 3 years, has been able to usurp the power of law enforcement to have political opposition criminalized- proud boys-,has been able to enact martial law, use force to supress political opposition, and escape all accountability. It is highly unlikely he will loose the next election.
It seems like a no-win situation. Poilievre knows he may be able to win as a populist but he lacks the political will to govern as a populist so he is courting the elites, however by doing so he looses his populist appeal so will most likely loose the next election. Its hard to find a populist leader who can garner the political will to govern as a populist. Trump was able to do it for the first half of his presidency but lost the political will to govern as a populist when the other side demonstrated they were willing to do anything, including civil war, to regain power.
Most likely now that Poilievre is party leader he is a member of the ruling class so he is no longer interested in the plight of the common man but only in how he can manipulate the common man into servitude of the ruling class. His supporters were naive and believed a career politician to be principled. They should have known that he would say what ever it takes to get elected. Maybe now that he's crossed the floor George Soros will buy him a house Martha's Vineyard so that he can live in a style befitting a member of the aristocracy.
Also I've never heard you comment on Gavin McInnes' historical opinion that in the mid 1980s the feminists under the direction of Gloria Steinem shut down all the interest and hobby clubs. Humans are sexually dimorphic and as a result they have propensities to socialize in different ways. Males generally socialize around shared interests hence according to McInnes up until the mid 1980s our society was composed of lots and lots of special interests activity clubs run by mostly males that were structured around their individual shared interests. Women don't have a high propensity to socialize in this way the the feminists according McInnest shut down all the interest and hobby clubs in the mid 1980s. I've taken a lot of sociology courses but I've never read anyone other than McInnest talk about the feminists war on interest and hobby clubs in the mid 1980s. I would be very interested to hear your opinion on this matter as well as any supporting evidence.
I have some thoughts on why feminism has become so widespread and entrenched. The preconditions for feminism's spread include our biological natures being that men take the care and protection of women and children seriously. Men tend to be very busy doing the things that keep our civilization going, so may not have time to delve deeply into the validity of complaints made by women. A big cause of the spread of feminism is that it was taken up as a useful tool for spreading communism and damaging institutions that communism wishes to destroy.
I'm glad you brought up the destruction of interest groups and hobbies. Notice how it was always women demanding access to something the guys were doing, playing golf at the club, for example. We never saw men pushing to get into a church ladies' auxiliary or some local Business Women's club (at least not until the trans invasion of women's restrooms, locker rooms, etc., but those guys are doing it under the claim the ARE women). I was a kid when this was going on, and I could never understand what the harm was for men to do something together.
That the movement that includes female separatists as well as applauding the idea of reducing (or eliminating) the male percent of the population sees MGOTW as a huge problem is just another example of how feminist "equality" is really a game of rules for thee but not for me.
MGTOW poses the ultimate threat to feminism: that feminism’s abusive, sexist, hate-filled agenda might be defused or neutralized by simply turning one’s back to it, walking away, and refusing to engage in the spheres where feminism operates its oppressive regime. Having gained astonishing political power by weaponizing victimhood, they now want to pull off the ultimate intellectual fraud: men are victimizing women by desiring them; or else they’re victimizing women by ignoring them. Way to have your cake and eat it, too! Why should we be surprised? Feminism has always relied on hypocrisy to achieve its goals and the institutions that give it power don’t seem inclined to put an end to it.
Indeed. Well said.
MGTOW is a rational response to being attacked, similar to the way white males have become more right wing overall. These leftist activists have spent decades demonising straight white males, then they act surprised and offended when the targeted group turns away from them. What a joke.
My only surprise is that far more men don't turn away in disgust and self-preservation. It testifies to men's enormous hopefulness, resilience, interest in or enthrallment to women (in some cases), and principled commitment to doing their part that they continue to accept their state-sanctioned enslavement. I feel a combination of admiration and impatience in thinking of it.
I think it is easy to forget that across swathes of the population people live remarkably traditional lives, and those who dont, aspire to live in much that way. I see some differences in the "post industrial " city I live in. Mainly in younger families both having to work full time rather than the preferred "one and a half " that held away for decades. However there is little confusion about what gender roles should be and that males are providers and child and home are feminine. Now in the University areas and fashionable "professionals" suburbs it's different. But in a working class city the main impact of feminism is felt when people have to deal with officialdom, generally for most that is relatively rare. Which is why I guess our political elite hate the working class, even the party which was founded to support working men and women.
I think that people men and women are genuinely surprised by the sorts things that they discover if they do have to deal with any branch of officialdom.
I no longer admire men who go along with it but in defence of some of them, they don't know any better. After all, the propaganda worked on me for a while too, until I eventually learned to see through it.
I share your ambivalence. In one way it's admirable; in another, just cowardice.
"Cowardice" it's a conundrum. For the very acme of "cowardice" in my social circles is any "attack" on women and children. By a man. The cleverness of feminists has been to ever widen what is seen as an "attack" on women and children. On the traditional level this sort of thing included not putting women and children first, not being a good provider, etc. All of which of course remains the exact same but now with added forms of horrors such as not cheering on women's footballers or not stumping up money for any number of women's causes or even suggesting "due process" for Male defendants. Just as mother Pankhurst handed out white feathers in the modern world there are a shed load of ways men can be labelled "cowards" if they don't tow the line. After all the animus against MGTOW is really that they are cowardly ducking out of their moral responsibility to support women and children. For what could be more cowardly than just "looking after no. 1" ? The clever manipulation of shaming men has to be one of the huge successes of feminism. After all when in Germany and Sweden an influx of people from a very different culture led to "harrassment" feminists there didn't say women should use their "power" and see off the upstarts, no they berated German and Swedish men for not seeing off these pests. And no doubt a parade of policemen and politicians were suitably shamed for not manning up sufficiently.
Or they denied that it had happened altogether, and said that any man who claimed it had was a reprehensible racist.
Piers Morgan's latest interview with Andrew Tate was revealing, I thought. Morgan was unrelenting. He wanted to Tate to admit and apologize for his statement that 19 year old women are more attractive than 26 year old women. In Morgan's view this was unacceptable misogyny. He kept prodding Tate over and over, "just say, yes I said that, it was wrong, and I apologize". Tate, to his credit, disputed that the remark was misogynistic, and refused to apologize. Funny how all the blatant misandry which you cite in this essay never even shows up on the radar of male feminists like Piers Morgan.
Interesting. I'll look for the interview. As we all know, sexual attraction is just a social construct!
Here's the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGWGcESPltM
I found that intriguing, Morgan saying that having a sexual preference for females of a certain age is Misogyny, but when women have a sexual preference it is empowerment.
For evidence of the relative attractiveness of women age 19 versus age 26, just look at the ages of contestants in beauty contests (at least prior to woke additions of men in drag) and the career peaks of most actresses.
The civil, civilized liberal society that we were working toward has now turned into a hate-filled and hateful uncivil, illiberal society. Feminism with their neo-Marxist class conflict view of society were the font of hate, well documented by Janice, hate now taken up by "anti-racist" anti-whites and LGBTQ2S activists and groomers. Add to all that ugliness the upsurge in antisemitism, Jews now being imaginatively redefined as "privileged." The "justice" system has joined with a high tolerance for crime and criminals. The attack on prosperity in the name of "climate justice" will leave us poor as well as hated. It is all too horrible. Hobbes was right: where there is a war of all against all, civilization is not possible.
The double standards are exhausting. One example, women demand men to be in their traditional masculinity while they do not want to be traditional themselves.
Feminism has always been this way. Feminists want all the perks they see men getting - while ignoring the responsibilities men shoulder. Feminists decry the idea that women should have any responsibilities to anyone else, and want everyone to ignore them wanting everyone to not notice them hanging onto the perks traditionally accorded to ladies.
What is the difference between a spoiled child and a radical feminist?
A spoiled child whose will is thwarted will cry, "I HATE YOU!!"
A feminist whose will is thwarted will cry, " YOU HATE ALL WOMEN!!"
At least the spoiled child is more honest.
So feminism is determined to show that it is a movement of spoiled children who react only emotionally, devoid of principle and who project their hatred onto others.
They who profess to hate sex stereotyping act according to the ancient stereotype of women as hysterics driven by emotion. (I would say NAWALT) And when i noticed this and other double standards in 2017, my own 40 year long feminism dissolved
so of course MGTOW , who actually give feminists what they say they want, ie no interference by men in their lives will still hear the cry "I HATE YOU!!" which as I hope to have shown is what is really meant buy the cry "you hate all women"
I mean, who would want to deal with an irrational child who wants her whims catered to regardless of how they change and will still blame men for continuing to be discontent?
To those who say such a view is a caricature of feminism, as I was told just the other night, I would answer that they do not know feminist theory.
Thanks, Ms Fiamengo for reminding us of said feminist theory
Good point--they haven't even got the honesty of children!
One could be mistaken thinking Janice had written about the situation here in Australia, which is purportedly the world's most misandristric country and ranked 9th "Best countries for women" in 2022 (Canada was 6th in the usnews.com post).
After my experiance in our misandristic family courts that cost me my family, my home, my job and mental and physical health, I'm definitely MGTOW and contentedly happy to be so.
So sorry to hear of it.
I got canned in a CUPE union environment because a female staff accused me of workplace bullying for avoiding her!
Feminism is determined to place all men into a no-win scenario.
Feminism is coercive control. Perpetrators of coercive control do not like their victims escaping their control. MGTOW is escape for men, hence feminist ire is automatic. The feminist war against male-to-female trans has the same basis.
As well as the MGTOW 'phenomenon' as an adult, non-violent, self-preserving way for men to deal with Feminists and those who hate men, males, masculinity and associated constructs, we men also need to implement a second phase - that of supporting one another... females will undermine each other, steal boyfriends and husbands from each other, and they compete in so many ways with each other, from hair, clothes, social status etc. If all (most, at least) men were to genuinely support other men - ideally with a brotherhood creed and universal understanding of the role and challenges of a man in 'modern' society, we could be immensely more powerful - not for the sake of power, but as a mental health thing. If we could be rid of simps, beta orbiters, those in the friend zone - if we could inform other men thinking of getting married, if we could help those falsely accused... if we could un-indoctrinate male feminists (hint, they will never get laid claiming to be a feminist), if we vote with our wallets, and at the ballot boxes - if we refuse to be screamed at and ridiculed, to be cast as guilty for nothing more than our chromosomes... if we turn our backs on the hysterics, and if we help the fatherless generation who don't know how to be, or what it means to be, an adult man - then we become powerful.
I think of that Simpsons episode (yeah, I know, a horrible show from a male perspective for so many reasons) where the business mascots, when ignored, lose their power... monk mode, denial of our services to society and a supportive culture for and by men is what is required, He are better than they think / claim - we can show ourselves to be the adults in society, the responsible gender and soon, the craziness will dissipate and we can deal with some of the bigger issues we all face...
Thomas Ellis wrote the Rantings of a Single Male, in his book his partner who identifies as a feminist rewards him when he gets it right. The is a reflection of what Esther Vilar had previously written about in particular "The Manipulated Man" which as a side note was banned from sale on Amazon for a short period of time.
Un-freak'in believable. This will be shared with other MRA's, thank you.
Good article. Several years ago I came to the conclusion that MGTOW is a consciousness and it's not that we reject the company of women so much as we withdraw our sanction of the victim. I did a video about that, MGTOW Consciousness. And personally I take the view that for rational women the rational response to MGTOW is WGTOW, because women should revoke their sanction of the victim, too.
From 2002 to 2012 I was a member of the Cowlitz Indian Tribal Council, but resigned in protest when several women on council attacked me and demanded my removal for protesting a sexist anti-male poster. Several years later my best friend, who died in May of this year after being vaxxxed 4 times, persuaded me to run and I was elected in a landslide in 2020.
I bring this up because two of the women on council, immediately following the death of my best friend, who was our tribal chairman, began attacking our new tribal chairwoman and as I defended her they dredged up my library of YouTube videos to accuse me of misogyny.
They've riled up the handful of Progressives in our tribe to demand my removal, and a few weeks ago one of them got a Temporary Protection Order against me after I, in reply to an email she sent to me and the others on tribal council, sent her the link to my MGTOW Consciousness video in which I quoted Turd Flinging Monkey as saying MGTOW (those of us in the Acceptance stage of the grieving process) are better able to love women than anybody else.
The hearing was 10 days ago and the judge dismissed her complaint.
Although we have a reservation, few of our members are reservation Indians. Most of us grew up out in the world and most of the time live like most other Americans, though we still retain some traditional practices. The member who got the TPO against me has a PhD in Psychology while when I graduated from the University of Washington in 1981 I had more than 270 quarter credits. So we're not stereotypical Indians.
But maybe we should be. Most indigenous Americans are classified as White or Black or Asian because they're considered "part-Indian." If American Indians were counted the same way as Black Americans, I suspect that in the US we would account for 60 million or more, but that would be inconvenient for the Progressives, who claim America is a racist nation.
More recently, just a couple days ago, The Suffolk Times published an article in which a young member who has a useless degree was quoted as saying our tribe rejects Capitalism. I reached out to them to correct the lie, and suggested they contact our tribal chairwoman. We'll see what they do.
As for the Progressives trying to get me removed from council for my reality-based views, I've been attacked so many times by Progressives that I find them irritating, and I will be sure to keep this article in my back pocket to share with our entire membership should their effort to remove me result in a recall hearing.
Did you know that complaining against a female health professional is criminal harassment in Toronto? Toronto Police will even tell you that you should withdraw your complaint!
My mother saw a female psychiatrist for decades. The psychiatrist prescribed my mother a controlled substance that has no connection with her condition. My mother was a schizophrenic. A full blown classic case that passed all the tests of a first year phycology course. She claimed to hear a voice in static that was a deity giving her super powers. Her case even passes the culturally inappropriate test for schizophrenia i.e. a Christian who believes while praying in a church that they hear the voice of god fails the schizophrenia test because it culturally appropriate for Christians to hear god while praying in a church however hearing the voice of god in static passes the schizophrenia test because its culturally inappropriate. The female psychiatrist prescribed my mother dextroamphetamine and had her on it for over 15 years. Dextroamphetamine is a controlled substance that is only ever prescribed for two conditions neither of which my mother has even a remote symptom.
I complained to both the Canadian college of physicians and the OPP but nothing was ever done.
Female doctor privilege in Canada. They are above the law and can do no wrong.
I banged my hand once and couldn't move my finger so I went into the emergency room at a hospital in Ontario. I didn't really hurt but I couldn't move the distal phalanx. There was a female emergency room physician on duty. She ordered x-rays then started prodding my finger and squishing it. All of a sudden a shooting, intense pain shot through my whole arm. She looked kind of puzzled and kept poking away at my finger. Then she got the x-rays and jumped back in surprise and withdrew both her hands right away. I ended up needing surgery to repair the tendon in my finger and they had to cut open my whole finger and put in a titanium screw. The women doctor screwed up big time. She shouldn't have started playing with my finger until she saw the x-ray. She caused me further injury.
Then 2 days after the surgery I get called into the hospital. This 30 something female surgeon comes bounding and giggling into the examination room and starts taking off my bandages and then in a goofy sing-song voice says "I don't know what I'm doing". I just snapped at her and shouted. "What the hell do you mean you don't know what you're doing!". She ran out of the room and this middle aged nurse comes into the room and with a scowl on her house tells me to leave the room. Neither one would put the bandages back on. Finally they got a hold of the head surgeon. It was an administrative error. They had scheduled my for the pre-surgery consolation again. Legally the female surgeon committed a criminal offence but nothing ever happened to her.
The miracle of feminist Trudeau sunny ways. If you offended the female surgeon that’s a criminal offense in Toronto.
I haven't seen in any of your videos an explanation for why feminism has been so successful and what can be done to stop it. As far as I can tell at some point in the mid 19th century one group of white guys in power decided they could weaponize "penis envy" against their political opponents. But it's like using a biological weapon. Sure it may initially wipe out your enemy but then it quickly mutates and exterminates all human life on Earth.
Also Poilievre should have simply stated that they did nothing wrong in including the tags and that Incels and MGTOW are not misogynists. Clearly Incels do not hate women. They want the government to provide them with wives (although I after they did they would soon be lobbying the government to take the wives away :).
It doesn't matter how bad Trudeau is, if Poilievre splits the right he won't win. If he doesn't join with PPC, he will just have a repeat of the last election in which PPC took enough votes for Conservatives to loose. Doing things like alienating MGTOW, going to Ukraine rallies with the uniparty, being pro immigration are going to leave conservative voters who vote PPC voting PPC because those are some of the major issue that the PPC addresses. He's just making the same mistake to last leader did trying to court the liberal voters who will never vote for him anyway. He doesn't have a chance of getting voters who vote liberal or NDP to vote Conservative. They vote based on ideology not on issues. The votes he can win are the PPC votes.
Trudeau in contrast, despite having absolutely no populist appeal and being extremely unpopular, has been able to garner an immense amount of political will--much more than any Canadian Prime Minister in recent history. He has his minority government unquestionably propped up by the NDP for the next 3 years, has been able to usurp the power of law enforcement to have political opposition criminalized- proud boys-,has been able to enact martial law, use force to supress political opposition, and escape all accountability. It is highly unlikely he will loose the next election.
It seems like a no-win situation. Poilievre knows he may be able to win as a populist but he lacks the political will to govern as a populist so he is courting the elites, however by doing so he looses his populist appeal so will most likely loose the next election. Its hard to find a populist leader who can garner the political will to govern as a populist. Trump was able to do it for the first half of his presidency but lost the political will to govern as a populist when the other side demonstrated they were willing to do anything, including civil war, to regain power.
Most likely now that Poilievre is party leader he is a member of the ruling class so he is no longer interested in the plight of the common man but only in how he can manipulate the common man into servitude of the ruling class. His supporters were naive and believed a career politician to be principled. They should have known that he would say what ever it takes to get elected. Maybe now that he's crossed the floor George Soros will buy him a house Martha's Vineyard so that he can live in a style befitting a member of the aristocracy.
Also I've never heard you comment on Gavin McInnes' historical opinion that in the mid 1980s the feminists under the direction of Gloria Steinem shut down all the interest and hobby clubs. Humans are sexually dimorphic and as a result they have propensities to socialize in different ways. Males generally socialize around shared interests hence according to McInnes up until the mid 1980s our society was composed of lots and lots of special interests activity clubs run by mostly males that were structured around their individual shared interests. Women don't have a high propensity to socialize in this way the the feminists according McInnest shut down all the interest and hobby clubs in the mid 1980s. I've taken a lot of sociology courses but I've never read anyone other than McInnest talk about the feminists war on interest and hobby clubs in the mid 1980s. I would be very interested to hear your opinion on this matter as well as any supporting evidence.
I have some thoughts on why feminism has become so widespread and entrenched. The preconditions for feminism's spread include our biological natures being that men take the care and protection of women and children seriously. Men tend to be very busy doing the things that keep our civilization going, so may not have time to delve deeply into the validity of complaints made by women. A big cause of the spread of feminism is that it was taken up as a useful tool for spreading communism and damaging institutions that communism wishes to destroy.
I'm glad you brought up the destruction of interest groups and hobbies. Notice how it was always women demanding access to something the guys were doing, playing golf at the club, for example. We never saw men pushing to get into a church ladies' auxiliary or some local Business Women's club (at least not until the trans invasion of women's restrooms, locker rooms, etc., but those guys are doing it under the claim the ARE women). I was a kid when this was going on, and I could never understand what the harm was for men to do something together.
That the movement that includes female separatists as well as applauding the idea of reducing (or eliminating) the male percent of the population sees MGOTW as a huge problem is just another example of how feminist "equality" is really a game of rules for thee but not for me.
https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20060427004522/http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/38333/20060423-0000/www.kittennews.com/kn_mag/2004mag/01_jan04mag/jamesh_07.html