Excellent article. And I've watched your video with Hannah Spier.
These feminists write about men in more hateful ways than the Nazi's talked about Jews. They are vile and inhuman. But I can't hold back on the men in these institutions that let it happen and didn't end these programs after a month. 'Women's Studies' should have been strangled at birth.
Yes, it is almost unbelievable that it was allowed to happen. I often think about it and try to puzzle it out.
Some of it was sheer cowardice, of course. Nobody wants to oppose an angry, sorrowing woman. Some of it was self-hatred: men had already been propagandized for years about their toxicity, not least by their own mothers, sisters, and lovers.
Some was chivalry combined with ignorance: men didn't want to believe Pat Robertson; they wanted to believe that women were merely asking to be treated as full human beings, and they thought to themselves, 'Well, I want to treat women as full human beings, so I don't have a problem with that! I don't want to rape a woman, or deny her a job she is qualified to do. Therefore I will support these righteous demands and discussions."
Nobody at that point knew the impact, how it would snowball, how widespread the hatred and lies would become, how they would be codified in law and public policy and political program. Nobody foresaw #MeToo or the chipping away at men's right to self-defense in sexual assault trials.
I argued with well-intentioned and left-leaning men at the universities where I taught about these issues. They either didn't fully understand what they were welcoming, or saw it as useful to their own careers or flattering to their self-conception. Or they just wanted to get on with their own work, which of course consumed many of these truly dedicated academics.
The word Simp has been revived recently from over 100 years ago. It defines those men who'd do anything to win female approval. Needing female approval is such a motivating force in the world.
Also I'll mention your talk with Lawrence Krauss and your contribution to his book.
Actually the outcome was in plain sight if anyone took the time to study history. This so called feminism was first used in the nescient soviet union...with horrid results. No different than what has happened here in the west. Well played.
I would also add that there was a patronising attitude to some men. Perhaps they thought that equality and freedom from abuse was the 'real' feminism. So many people talk about that today before it 'all went wrong'. And they thought that these radical feminists were a lot of hysterical bra-burners, slightly barmy and not to be taken seriously.
What's the ROI in persuading a woman to drop feminism and to become a traditional housewife? Why sell to those who aren't even close to buying what you've got?
To compare, if you were a single, young, hot, tall, high-IQ man, and you were talking with a feminist, a woman who could be persuaded, would you spend off-hours on the side of your studies? If you had tried that with her, you would have believed she was salvageable.
She would have to be at least 'this naturally, biologically hot', and everything else also mentioned above; she would have to be a lot for you to try to talk with her. And if you succeed, then she has to eventually accept that feminism is bad for her and for society, and she has to salvage her own reputation, having worked this many years for the wrong side of the question. With the knowledge that she was betraying some sisterhood. And then she may change. If she chooses to.
If the majority of feminists aren't that attractive to the great men who could, and feminists are neither into physical beauty, nor the hobbies which improve looks or health, nor are they open to persuasion or arguments, nor the gender roles, why would the few able men try? If you're that much of a man, why not look for a classically traditional woman? Why pick one of the witches when there are devout women?
It's way more financially worthwhile to find out what businesses feminists buy from and invest their stocks. Why stop the feminists? Feminists don't look that good. They're left-leaning or liberal, and atheistic anti-natalists. Nor do they like men. The other group of women is good-looking, traditional, right-wing, and also psychologically religious. And they like men. They help men. So, when the sane women are natalists, and the insane are not, why would a man persuade a feminist to calm down? Why sell her marriage? Depression proof stocks and caution are wiser.
One can certainly hope that the feminists will not reproduce and the more traditional women will, and the problem will begin to solve itself.
The worrisome thing is that the feminists infect the non-feminists, and the cancer spreads. Even traditional women become, in general (not all, of course), more aggrieved, impatient, judgmental, entitled, selfish, etc. It's in the air and the water. Men change too, accepting feminist postulates.
And the whole of society is degraded and corrupted with feminist teachers, lawyers, therapists, judges, academics, social workers, journalists, heads of police, politicians, and so on, both women and men. The daughters of traditional women become feminists as the result of the influence of a feminist teacher or therapist. The son of traditional parents finds himself accused of something he didn't do, fired by a feminist boss, convicted by a feminist jury, and so on.
Caution is good, certainly. But it is ultimately impossible to avoid the impact of feminism in society altogether.
Yes, but millions of people, including academics, SHOULD have known what might happen due to the teaching of contempt for men, which led directly to the mobilization of resentment against men.
Feminists could well not have seen any connection between their implicit or even explicit hatred. And yet the precedents were, and are, not exactly esoteric. Two or three generations ago, many people saw no connection between casual snobbery toward Jews and the Nazi death camps. And to this day, many people see no connection between anti-Zionist rhetoric and the glorification of pro-Hamas terrorism. But no one needs a PhD in history to understand the connections. A simple moral compass, which everyone begins to develop in early childhood, should surely be enough to make ANYONE wary of hatred--the urge to harm--no matter which group is the target.
Whatever else might be said about Lenin, he was shrewd enough to exploit one feature of human nature for his own political purpose. By identifying some of them as "useful idiots," he converted them strategically from potential adversaries into potential assistants or even supporters. Feminists have learned a great deal from Marxist ideology. Getting men to cooperate in their own self-destruction, either personally or collectively, has been a brilliant coup.
".. Some of it was self-hatred: men had already been propagandized for years about their toxicity, not least by their own mothers, sisters, and lovers."
I lost a lover and maybe a future wife because of self-loathing. We had been in a romantic relationship for most a year when I was going full-time classes at the University. The last time we were together, it was afternoon and we were enjoying each-other on her bed and she did something that I really liked, and my emotions were suddenly deep and scary and at the moment I knew I loved her, the next moment I realized that I love her too much to let her love me because I was not worthy of her love. After I left, I got drunk and stayed drunk not answering the phone for days.
It really screwed me up. But not as much as learning that I had an unborn daughter that was ripped apart in an abortion, silently screaming to God of the Betrayal. I found out about her years later.
When are we going start hanging witches in public again? One 4 or 5 are hanged than they will go back into hiding - in closet - with the homosexuals
Whoever you are, Bob (or is it Bobbette?), you do not seem to realize that obscenity and emotion-laden accusation do not constitute argument. You merely pollute my comments section, for which I will endeavor to forgive you, but may fail if I allow you to continue to embarrass yourself.
It's really insane we have women even using terms like "emotional labor". I wonder if they even realise how it makes them look when they use these kind of terms..
Here, when I was a researcher in a project at Sheffield University in the early 80s, there were a number of female "post graduate" students. Busily spouting that eras "word salads" about oppression they also discussed how to get more work out of the Filipino hired help, also female (I have often wondered why the group all seemed to employ filipinos who were a bit of a rarity in the Sheffield of the day). I noted that liberating the sista hood didn't seem to include the women who actually were cooking, housekeeping and looking after their children. Nor indeed turning down the generosity of their Doctor, Professor, Lawyer husbands who funded their "studies". Studies that were "qualitative" and therefor dispensed with any hard stuff like structured interviews, maths, multivariate analysis, statistics and so on. In favour of reading books and discussing them with women they knew.
Outside the country was convulsed by the Miner's Strike, Northern Ireland terrorism, Cruise Missiles at Greenham Common, Riots and 10% unemployment. Inside there could be righteous indignation at their "oppression" before heading home to their homes in the "Peak District National Park" to see what Maria had made for Dinner.
It's great rhetoric when you don't want to find out what work needs to be done or what's profitable. "This is what we feminists want to do. Do men want that? No? They don't? Then the men are the problem."
Men who want women but don't want to find out what's attractive to women work very hard with all of the wrong things. I'm sure they're equally frustrated with how little such low-status men get from their selfish actions.
My art professor in college was a lesbian fat-acceptance feminist. She was a leader in the fat acceptance movement.
I wanted to learn how to draw and paint, but she spent so much time rambling about fat acceptance. She once said she found families "creepy," the term "mankind" offensive, and "why do we even need gender?" She acted extremely strange and I believe she was mentally ill.
My English professor randomly talked about how Queen Victoria thought lesbians don't exist (this might actually be a myth).
College was also the first time I encountered women who hyphenated their last names for feminist reasons.
I met a girl in college who told me, "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." Then, she met an older man with money and married him.
There is an interesting book that talks about feminism and witchcraft called The Anti-Mary Exposed. My college was a Catholic school. During the 60s and 70s many of the sisters became corrupted with feminism and leftism. There's a book called Sisters in Crisis that explains why this happened to many orders during this time. One of the sisters at my school left to become a witch and formed a coven that included other sisters.
Never once in my education did I hear a criticism of feminism, women, or marxism. Never once did I hear anything positive said about men.
Thanks, Lake. It would all be amusing if it weren't so sad and aggravating.
I have recently been emailing with an old friend, an artist who recently realized that she needed to be able to draw better in order to realize her conceptions. This is someone who grew up under the modern (and feminist, I suspect) insistence that ideas are more important than technique. So later in life, she has immersed herself in representational basics, and is finding it very rewarding.
*The Anti-Mary Exposed* is by my friend Carrie Gress. She also has a wonderful book, *The End of Woman,* about some of the First and Second Wave feminists. She is coming out with a new book about the impossibility of reconciling Christianity and feminism.
Indeed, the story about Queen Victoria is almost certainly apocryphal. It is used to lightly dismiss the potentially embarrassing fact that the formal criminalisation of homosexuality left lesbians alone. The co-opting of the gay rights movement by feminist lesbians (cynically taking advantage of the AIDS crisis, when gay men had other things on their mind) is a seldom discussed pivot point in identity grievance politics and thus in the entire direction of culture from the mid-eighties. When GLB became LGB, despite the fact that lesbians were not suffering any of the injustices that instigated the movement, the floodgates opened and the slope became very slippery indeed.
You also have to remember that you wouldn’t get a root (Aussie term for sex) if you didn’t go along. Men will do almost anything for sex.
I think women instinctually know this and exploited it big time.
Conversely it’s not common amongst men who work with their hands.
Now women are trying to get into this field as well and as usual it’s only successful in large companies where their inferiority can be hidden.
The rise of women’s power is related to the corporatisation of the work force. That’s why they dominate in institutions and government. There is no changing it now except to defund and abandon the institution. I suspect it will be forced by circumstance (war, economic depression, invasion, civil war, pestilence )
not by intention. The west has to fail for the bullshit to end unfortunately.
I hope not, Tom, but increasingly I believe it may be so.
I think men do better, overall (in the sex and romance department, I mean) in not agreeing with women's demands, but it is a rocky road, for sure, and I wouldn't like to do it.
I agree with that. However only one side is asked to put down their weapons. If you speak to working class women they have no problem identifying all the ways in which women seek power and control. If you speak to uni educated women it’s crickets. It’s like the US navy response to carrying nuclear weapons, neither confirm or deny.
Men need to learn to push back and fight with women without their weapons.
Mens weapons - loud voice, scary aggression, physical force etc. Women’s weapons - emotional manipulation, greater facility with language, no rules in fighting, weaponisation of vulnerability, hysteria etc etc. But modern women don’t even acknowledge these weapons exist and hence use them indiscriminately. It’s not a surprise that men sometimes use their weapons too.
"You also have to remember that you wouldn’t get a root (Aussie term for sex) if you didn’t go along. "
Thomas Ellis, author of "The Rantings of a Single Man", mentions this in his book, how his feminist girlfriend would reward him when he agreed with her.
As always, our efforts to raise awareness of female force of influence in the human system (including negative force of influence) is hampered by blanket denial of FemalePower. Even as these feminists bitterly complain about female powerlessness, they're working their female power to "radically change all institutions." Everyone's on board with Female Empowerment under the near universal assumption that women are without power.
Yet, in every facet of gender conflict, gender activism, gender issues, gender studies, gender politics, gender *anything*, there is femininism on the one hand and on the other hand there's . . . nothing. How could a "powerless" people affect such an ideological dictatorship?
It's already evident that you have no interest in a good faith discussion about the serious issues of academic fraud and hate-mongering raised in this essay. In fact, I am fairly certain from your shallow jibes that you haven't read it. Perhaps you are applauded for barrages of snide rhetorical questions elsewhere, but it doesn't wash here. Good-bye.
I have seen statistics suggesting that women’s studies programs are losing ground in the academy and exerting less influence than they did at their height. Many academic leaders seem to think that we can just let their legacy of sexist hate-mongering recede into the past, but the damage is already widespread and ingrained throughout Western cultures. Their heinous effects will not be reversed until we have open discussions and educational campaigns to reveal their agenda and rectify its social, legal, economic and political impact.
Yes. The anti-male and anti-white hatred are fully entrenched.
The anti-scholarly and social-constructionist leftist nonsense these women created has literally (and I use that word literally!) spread everywhere in academia, especially into law, medicine, journalism, teaching, and all the social sciences, but even into particle physics and engineering. And then out into the society.
Check out the work of Chanda Prescod-Weinstein for starters. She has a prestigious position at the University of New Hampshire. She was part of the group, Particles for Justice, who worked to get a truly brilliant particle physicist, Alessandro Strumia, fired from his job because he doesn't go along with the need to hire more women and blacks in physics.
University leaders are mostly leftwing feminists. It's difficult to rise to the top in academia if you are not. At my small university, they ended the women's studies minor when they cut a lot of programs due to serious financial problems. But women's studies is ingrained in the other disciplines, especially English.
There was a university nearby that closed. Before it closed, the alumni banded together to keep it open one more year. The university claimed it was cutting left and right to stay afloat during that year. I noticed they never cut women's studies. They eventually closed.
What were the percentages of men and women among the students? People go to the universities to date. Yes, they become engineers, lawyers, doctors and such, but the stories are about dating and marriage.
If there aren't any men to date, it eventually falls. If there aren't any girls, then it's only for the most autistic boys, the department of engineering.
Thanks. That feminist ideology led to widespread belief that a man hugging a women in a room with other people is on the rape spectrum. Male power play. Toxic. File a grievance. Investigate his serial power plays.
To stop the chaos, let's require 50% males in these nonsense academic departments.
The women are like uranium atoms and the resentment ideology is a cascade of free electrons. It's a chain reaction of nonsense once women congregate together and start projecting inner loathing onto masculinity.
And let's impose basic requirements on scientific knowledge production. A minimum number of patents, papers passing logic argument scientific method and reproducibility tests.
And if they can't be reasonable or produce anything of value then they'll be replaced with alternative faculty that does something.
As a Gen Xer who undertook a postgrad degree in an openly left wing institution in the UK in late 00s, to be honest the feminism courses were there and there were many of the exaggerated symptoms I now find today have created a culture of grievances and entitlement divorced from reality.
I had no idea the history of feminism involved the authors and ideas mentioned in this essay. Thanks for writing and sharing :)
A couple of weeks ago over drinks at a table with 4 women acquaintances/friends, I did voice the opinion (stemming from my current analysis of western society/decadence) that feminism was problematic, and I was basically hounded out. The tragedy of the context however was that two of the ladies were single, one in her early 50s, the other mid 40s, with no children, while the other two had children, but I believe one was separated. It's a social scene where I often meet women in their 40s and 50s who are unmarried without children. And I only mention this because it's only been over the last few years when I've realized my mistake of not settling and starting a family a decade ago, whereas none of the women I meet in their 40s and 50s are able or have done the same, because I can only imagine the heartache reaching such a conclusion will entail. And so occasionally here on substack I come across refrains about women in their 60s who regret being single and childless, but this has yet to enter the zeitgeist unfortunately. The damage the extreme forms of feminism have done to women, and men, to societies across the West, I think we have barely started to realize and account for it. And unfortunately there's a lot of conspiracies, some which might be less conspiracy the more transparency is unearthed about the 60s (for instance, CIA funding new left magazines and counterculture), and I dare say a lot of toxic male views. That's why it's great to read a retrospective highlighting the more extreme views of feminism in the 60s.
Thank you! The essay was originally much longer and with many more quotations from the texts in Rothenberg's course, but my husband said he felt the need to kill himself while I was only halfway through reading it to him, it was so repetitive and gruesome, so I shortened it.
A good example here is the continued resistance, by the feminist ministers in the labour government, to an "Inquiry" (in which a judge leads and evidence is given under oath) into the continuing 30 year old "Grooming Gangs" scandal. The latest twist being all the prominent victims (proven by the conviction in due process) on the advisory panel setting up the Inquiry resigning. Due to the Minister's (Jess Phillips) attempts to "dilute" the Racial and Cultural context. In effect feminists desperate to deny justice to girls and women (and boys actually) because there are the wrong sort of perpetrators and they couldn't care less about working class girls and women.
Rape Culture was a seventies documentary/movie about the rape of males in institutions. Feminists later co-opted the language and concepts and distorted them to exclude those it was meant to help.
I did some research on Islamic Law because I kept seeing the memes about women's testimony value is 1/3 of a man's value.
1/3 is probably about right for Muslim women that grew-up hearing and maybe seeing false-witnessers stoned to death. So, the threat that keeps her more honest in those cultures.
But in the West women are immune to mercy and Justice, immune to Truth and Good-Order, to Loving Correction and so, some get sicker and sicker without limits.
So, their testimony value might be best set at 1/10 a man's value.
Each year this value can be adjusted based on recent Parental-Fraud metrics, False Rape metrics, perhaps other ways of sampling their [lack-of] virtue.
How can men's virtue be measured?
So, Islamic Law is much saner and more sensible about women. I never found the 1/3 value but I did read about 1/2 when testifying about sex. Men have zero value when subject is birth of babies, or other women-only related.
It has gravely changed men also. The whole Incel thing and the declining number of men having sex due to being intimidated by women and not trusting women. Feminists, while not running ads promoting porn have never been against it. One of the most degrading things a woman can do, but they promote it. Porn creates sexless males also. Even high school and College students are having much less sex. I am all for that for the right reasons, but young people are stuck in neutral, and confused about the nature of the opposite sex.
Movies continue to portray romance as fairly normal. I think a good twist would be a script about a feminist who inadvertantly realizes she is falling in love with a man and then questions the whole brainwashing she received. Turning Point as been a fairly successful in drawing women to the natural ideals of sex and marriage and realizing it is their path to fullfillment rather than feminism which thinks being an asshole and believing stupid things is the path to fulfillment.
Actually that is brilliant, some of the more conservative producers or whatever they're called need to make a movie like this or several of them. Also about women realizing they've been shortchanged and very much resenting what feminism taught them to believe.
And a great novel, if one likes James' three-page paragraph, analyze-everything-to-death style. I happen to like it quite a bit. That novel still astounds me: how did he understand the entire issue so deeply? Incredible.
I recently bought the novel and it has taken its place in my never ending books pile. I'm familiar with James' 'taking the scenic route' style after reading a compendium of his ghost stories and 'Portrait of a Lady'; throughout the latter I wanted to shake the heroine by the shoulders and shout "Marry the handsome, rich young stud who loves you, you fool!".
Thanks for exposing the evolution of women's studies. Palgrave published that book in 2008. By 2020 they published a book called The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Menstruation Studies (because everything is viewed through the lens of 'critical studies' today). There is a chapter called "Degendering Menstruation: Making Trans Menstruators Matter" and other contemporary wonders. This is referenced in a post about tampons and tech. https://margox.substack.com/p/tampon-truth?r=1kuq0
Where is Tampon Tim on this? This is very funny and I think the women "studying" this line of teaching are falling further into their rabbit hole of despair. It can only be here as a purposeful plant from the left, Marxism or more likely just Satan.
It is unclear to me whether the governors, red or blue, have any clue as to what it is they support when they profess to support 'free tampons,' any more than the women do. Stupid comes in many forms and certainly the devil can be deceiving.
Thank you, as always, for your impressively insightful post! 💙
It's high time we started calling feminism extremism because that is precisely what it is. The whole ideology breeds hate — evil. It seems the exact opposite of religion.
Outstanding article. You have well identified the poisonous Marxist nature of the feminist movement. I think we can say they have proven successful in creating a large cohort of women who embrace a victim mentality and who are resentful and deeply unhappy.
They have done enormous damage to western society.
The left captured the means of cultural production and they still hold it: school media. Until that changes nothing changes. Millions of children are being a indoctrinated now.
He studied at the university in the same way as do the sons of well-to-do people today.
Later, and for the rest of his life, he was supported by his friend Friedrich Engels, who—being a manufacturer—was the worst type of "bourgeois," according to socialist ideas.
In the language of Marxism, he was an exploiter.” – Ludwig von Mises
Excellent article. And I've watched your video with Hannah Spier.
These feminists write about men in more hateful ways than the Nazi's talked about Jews. They are vile and inhuman. But I can't hold back on the men in these institutions that let it happen and didn't end these programs after a month. 'Women's Studies' should have been strangled at birth.
Yes, it is almost unbelievable that it was allowed to happen. I often think about it and try to puzzle it out.
Some of it was sheer cowardice, of course. Nobody wants to oppose an angry, sorrowing woman. Some of it was self-hatred: men had already been propagandized for years about their toxicity, not least by their own mothers, sisters, and lovers.
Some was chivalry combined with ignorance: men didn't want to believe Pat Robertson; they wanted to believe that women were merely asking to be treated as full human beings, and they thought to themselves, 'Well, I want to treat women as full human beings, so I don't have a problem with that! I don't want to rape a woman, or deny her a job she is qualified to do. Therefore I will support these righteous demands and discussions."
Nobody at that point knew the impact, how it would snowball, how widespread the hatred and lies would become, how they would be codified in law and public policy and political program. Nobody foresaw #MeToo or the chipping away at men's right to self-defense in sexual assault trials.
I argued with well-intentioned and left-leaning men at the universities where I taught about these issues. They either didn't fully understand what they were welcoming, or saw it as useful to their own careers or flattering to their self-conception. Or they just wanted to get on with their own work, which of course consumed many of these truly dedicated academics.
The word Simp has been revived recently from over 100 years ago. It defines those men who'd do anything to win female approval. Needing female approval is such a motivating force in the world.
Also I'll mention your talk with Lawrence Krauss and your contribution to his book.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3-2JbiE9eI
Actually the outcome was in plain sight if anyone took the time to study history. This so called feminism was first used in the nescient soviet union...with horrid results. No different than what has happened here in the west. Well played.
I would also add that there was a patronising attitude to some men. Perhaps they thought that equality and freedom from abuse was the 'real' feminism. So many people talk about that today before it 'all went wrong'. And they thought that these radical feminists were a lot of hysterical bra-burners, slightly barmy and not to be taken seriously.
What's the ROI in persuading a woman to drop feminism and to become a traditional housewife? Why sell to those who aren't even close to buying what you've got?
To compare, if you were a single, young, hot, tall, high-IQ man, and you were talking with a feminist, a woman who could be persuaded, would you spend off-hours on the side of your studies? If you had tried that with her, you would have believed she was salvageable.
She would have to be at least 'this naturally, biologically hot', and everything else also mentioned above; she would have to be a lot for you to try to talk with her. And if you succeed, then she has to eventually accept that feminism is bad for her and for society, and she has to salvage her own reputation, having worked this many years for the wrong side of the question. With the knowledge that she was betraying some sisterhood. And then she may change. If she chooses to.
If the majority of feminists aren't that attractive to the great men who could, and feminists are neither into physical beauty, nor the hobbies which improve looks or health, nor are they open to persuasion or arguments, nor the gender roles, why would the few able men try? If you're that much of a man, why not look for a classically traditional woman? Why pick one of the witches when there are devout women?
It's way more financially worthwhile to find out what businesses feminists buy from and invest their stocks. Why stop the feminists? Feminists don't look that good. They're left-leaning or liberal, and atheistic anti-natalists. Nor do they like men. The other group of women is good-looking, traditional, right-wing, and also psychologically religious. And they like men. They help men. So, when the sane women are natalists, and the insane are not, why would a man persuade a feminist to calm down? Why sell her marriage? Depression proof stocks and caution are wiser.
One can certainly hope that the feminists will not reproduce and the more traditional women will, and the problem will begin to solve itself.
The worrisome thing is that the feminists infect the non-feminists, and the cancer spreads. Even traditional women become, in general (not all, of course), more aggrieved, impatient, judgmental, entitled, selfish, etc. It's in the air and the water. Men change too, accepting feminist postulates.
And the whole of society is degraded and corrupted with feminist teachers, lawyers, therapists, judges, academics, social workers, journalists, heads of police, politicians, and so on, both women and men. The daughters of traditional women become feminists as the result of the influence of a feminist teacher or therapist. The son of traditional parents finds himself accused of something he didn't do, fired by a feminist boss, convicted by a feminist jury, and so on.
Caution is good, certainly. But it is ultimately impossible to avoid the impact of feminism in society altogether.
Yes, but millions of people, including academics, SHOULD have known what might happen due to the teaching of contempt for men, which led directly to the mobilization of resentment against men.
Feminists could well not have seen any connection between their implicit or even explicit hatred. And yet the precedents were, and are, not exactly esoteric. Two or three generations ago, many people saw no connection between casual snobbery toward Jews and the Nazi death camps. And to this day, many people see no connection between anti-Zionist rhetoric and the glorification of pro-Hamas terrorism. But no one needs a PhD in history to understand the connections. A simple moral compass, which everyone begins to develop in early childhood, should surely be enough to make ANYONE wary of hatred--the urge to harm--no matter which group is the target.
Whatever else might be said about Lenin, he was shrewd enough to exploit one feature of human nature for his own political purpose. By identifying some of them as "useful idiots," he converted them strategically from potential adversaries into potential assistants or even supporters. Feminists have learned a great deal from Marxist ideology. Getting men to cooperate in their own self-destruction, either personally or collectively, has been a brilliant coup.
".. Some of it was self-hatred: men had already been propagandized for years about their toxicity, not least by their own mothers, sisters, and lovers."
I lost a lover and maybe a future wife because of self-loathing. We had been in a romantic relationship for most a year when I was going full-time classes at the University. The last time we were together, it was afternoon and we were enjoying each-other on her bed and she did something that I really liked, and my emotions were suddenly deep and scary and at the moment I knew I loved her, the next moment I realized that I love her too much to let her love me because I was not worthy of her love. After I left, I got drunk and stayed drunk not answering the phone for days.
It really screwed me up. But not as much as learning that I had an unborn daughter that was ripped apart in an abortion, silently screaming to God of the Betrayal. I found out about her years later.
When are we going start hanging witches in public again? One 4 or 5 are hanged than they will go back into hiding - in closet - with the homosexuals
--
Yes, it was sane and ordered long ago, then ..;
"Multiverse Journal - Index Number 2227:, 27th September 2025, The Ongoing Worldwide Rape of Mind and Soul to fully realize Homo Umbrans" https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-2227
Don't I know it.
However, it speaks to your character to admit your shortcoming. Most men don't have what it takes to be honest with themselves vis a vis women.
Exhibit A of the typical feminist response to evidence of feminist bullying, bigotry, and hysteria.
Ah, Bob took the typical feminist way out.
Whoever you are, Bob (or is it Bobbette?), you do not seem to realize that obscenity and emotion-laden accusation do not constitute argument. You merely pollute my comments section, for which I will endeavor to forgive you, but may fail if I allow you to continue to embarrass yourself.
It's really insane we have women even using terms like "emotional labor". I wonder if they even realise how it makes them look when they use these kind of terms..
I think it makes them feel very important!
Here, when I was a researcher in a project at Sheffield University in the early 80s, there were a number of female "post graduate" students. Busily spouting that eras "word salads" about oppression they also discussed how to get more work out of the Filipino hired help, also female (I have often wondered why the group all seemed to employ filipinos who were a bit of a rarity in the Sheffield of the day). I noted that liberating the sista hood didn't seem to include the women who actually were cooking, housekeeping and looking after their children. Nor indeed turning down the generosity of their Doctor, Professor, Lawyer husbands who funded their "studies". Studies that were "qualitative" and therefor dispensed with any hard stuff like structured interviews, maths, multivariate analysis, statistics and so on. In favour of reading books and discussing them with women they knew.
Outside the country was convulsed by the Miner's Strike, Northern Ireland terrorism, Cruise Missiles at Greenham Common, Riots and 10% unemployment. Inside there could be righteous indignation at their "oppression" before heading home to their homes in the "Peak District National Park" to see what Maria had made for Dinner.
lol bulls eye!
It's great rhetoric when you don't want to find out what work needs to be done or what's profitable. "This is what we feminists want to do. Do men want that? No? They don't? Then the men are the problem."
Men who want women but don't want to find out what's attractive to women work very hard with all of the wrong things. I'm sure they're equally frustrated with how little such low-status men get from their selfish actions.
'Emotional labour' is the feminist's coalface, grimy, dangerous and energy sapping.
It's unbridled narcissism, pure and simple. "Unpaid emotional labor." How utterly transactional. It's so gross.
I wonder who they think will pay them for taking care of their own home and children.
My art professor in college was a lesbian fat-acceptance feminist. She was a leader in the fat acceptance movement.
I wanted to learn how to draw and paint, but she spent so much time rambling about fat acceptance. She once said she found families "creepy," the term "mankind" offensive, and "why do we even need gender?" She acted extremely strange and I believe she was mentally ill.
My English professor randomly talked about how Queen Victoria thought lesbians don't exist (this might actually be a myth).
College was also the first time I encountered women who hyphenated their last names for feminist reasons.
I met a girl in college who told me, "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." Then, she met an older man with money and married him.
There is an interesting book that talks about feminism and witchcraft called The Anti-Mary Exposed. My college was a Catholic school. During the 60s and 70s many of the sisters became corrupted with feminism and leftism. There's a book called Sisters in Crisis that explains why this happened to many orders during this time. One of the sisters at my school left to become a witch and formed a coven that included other sisters.
Never once in my education did I hear a criticism of feminism, women, or marxism. Never once did I hear anything positive said about men.
Thanks, Lake. It would all be amusing if it weren't so sad and aggravating.
I have recently been emailing with an old friend, an artist who recently realized that she needed to be able to draw better in order to realize her conceptions. This is someone who grew up under the modern (and feminist, I suspect) insistence that ideas are more important than technique. So later in life, she has immersed herself in representational basics, and is finding it very rewarding.
*The Anti-Mary Exposed* is by my friend Carrie Gress. She also has a wonderful book, *The End of Woman,* about some of the First and Second Wave feminists. She is coming out with a new book about the impossibility of reconciling Christianity and feminism.
Indeed, the story about Queen Victoria is almost certainly apocryphal. It is used to lightly dismiss the potentially embarrassing fact that the formal criminalisation of homosexuality left lesbians alone. The co-opting of the gay rights movement by feminist lesbians (cynically taking advantage of the AIDS crisis, when gay men had other things on their mind) is a seldom discussed pivot point in identity grievance politics and thus in the entire direction of culture from the mid-eighties. When GLB became LGB, despite the fact that lesbians were not suffering any of the injustices that instigated the movement, the floodgates opened and the slope became very slippery indeed.
You also have to remember that you wouldn’t get a root (Aussie term for sex) if you didn’t go along. Men will do almost anything for sex.
I think women instinctually know this and exploited it big time.
Conversely it’s not common amongst men who work with their hands.
Now women are trying to get into this field as well and as usual it’s only successful in large companies where their inferiority can be hidden.
The rise of women’s power is related to the corporatisation of the work force. That’s why they dominate in institutions and government. There is no changing it now except to defund and abandon the institution. I suspect it will be forced by circumstance (war, economic depression, invasion, civil war, pestilence )
not by intention. The west has to fail for the bullshit to end unfortunately.
I hope not, Tom, but increasingly I believe it may be so.
I think men do better, overall (in the sex and romance department, I mean) in not agreeing with women's demands, but it is a rocky road, for sure, and I wouldn't like to do it.
I agree with that. However only one side is asked to put down their weapons. If you speak to working class women they have no problem identifying all the ways in which women seek power and control. If you speak to uni educated women it’s crickets. It’s like the US navy response to carrying nuclear weapons, neither confirm or deny.
Men need to learn to push back and fight with women without their weapons.
Mens weapons - loud voice, scary aggression, physical force etc. Women’s weapons - emotional manipulation, greater facility with language, no rules in fighting, weaponisation of vulnerability, hysteria etc etc. But modern women don’t even acknowledge these weapons exist and hence use them indiscriminately. It’s not a surprise that men sometimes use their weapons too.
"You also have to remember that you wouldn’t get a root (Aussie term for sex) if you didn’t go along. "
Thomas Ellis, author of "The Rantings of a Single Man", mentions this in his book, how his feminist girlfriend would reward him when he agreed with her.
Thanks Janice!
As always, our efforts to raise awareness of female force of influence in the human system (including negative force of influence) is hampered by blanket denial of FemalePower. Even as these feminists bitterly complain about female powerlessness, they're working their female power to "radically change all institutions." Everyone's on board with Female Empowerment under the near universal assumption that women are without power.
Yet, in every facet of gender conflict, gender activism, gender issues, gender studies, gender politics, gender *anything*, there is femininism on the one hand and on the other hand there's . . . nothing. How could a "powerless" people affect such an ideological dictatorship?
It's already evident that you have no interest in a good faith discussion about the serious issues of academic fraud and hate-mongering raised in this essay. In fact, I am fairly certain from your shallow jibes that you haven't read it. Perhaps you are applauded for barrages of snide rhetorical questions elsewhere, but it doesn't wash here. Good-bye.
I have seen statistics suggesting that women’s studies programs are losing ground in the academy and exerting less influence than they did at their height. Many academic leaders seem to think that we can just let their legacy of sexist hate-mongering recede into the past, but the damage is already widespread and ingrained throughout Western cultures. Their heinous effects will not be reversed until we have open discussions and educational campaigns to reveal their agenda and rectify its social, legal, economic and political impact.
Yes. The anti-male and anti-white hatred are fully entrenched.
The anti-scholarly and social-constructionist leftist nonsense these women created has literally (and I use that word literally!) spread everywhere in academia, especially into law, medicine, journalism, teaching, and all the social sciences, but even into particle physics and engineering. And then out into the society.
What is feminist particle physics?
Check out the work of Chanda Prescod-Weinstein for starters. She has a prestigious position at the University of New Hampshire. She was part of the group, Particles for Justice, who worked to get a truly brilliant particle physicist, Alessandro Strumia, fired from his job because he doesn't go along with the need to hire more women and blacks in physics.
https://msmagazine.com/2019/05/07/why-chanda-prescod-weinstein-fuses-physics-with-black-feminism/
University leaders are mostly leftwing feminists. It's difficult to rise to the top in academia if you are not. At my small university, they ended the women's studies minor when they cut a lot of programs due to serious financial problems. But women's studies is ingrained in the other disciplines, especially English.
There was a university nearby that closed. Before it closed, the alumni banded together to keep it open one more year. The university claimed it was cutting left and right to stay afloat during that year. I noticed they never cut women's studies. They eventually closed.
What were the percentages of men and women among the students? People go to the universities to date. Yes, they become engineers, lawyers, doctors and such, but the stories are about dating and marriage.
If there aren't any men to date, it eventually falls. If there aren't any girls, then it's only for the most autistic boys, the department of engineering.
Thanks. That feminist ideology led to widespread belief that a man hugging a women in a room with other people is on the rape spectrum. Male power play. Toxic. File a grievance. Investigate his serial power plays.
To stop the chaos, let's require 50% males in these nonsense academic departments.
The women are like uranium atoms and the resentment ideology is a cascade of free electrons. It's a chain reaction of nonsense once women congregate together and start projecting inner loathing onto masculinity.
And let's impose basic requirements on scientific knowledge production. A minimum number of patents, papers passing logic argument scientific method and reproducibility tests.
And if they can't be reasonable or produce anything of value then they'll be replaced with alternative faculty that does something.
As a Gen Xer who undertook a postgrad degree in an openly left wing institution in the UK in late 00s, to be honest the feminism courses were there and there were many of the exaggerated symptoms I now find today have created a culture of grievances and entitlement divorced from reality.
I had no idea the history of feminism involved the authors and ideas mentioned in this essay. Thanks for writing and sharing :)
A couple of weeks ago over drinks at a table with 4 women acquaintances/friends, I did voice the opinion (stemming from my current analysis of western society/decadence) that feminism was problematic, and I was basically hounded out. The tragedy of the context however was that two of the ladies were single, one in her early 50s, the other mid 40s, with no children, while the other two had children, but I believe one was separated. It's a social scene where I often meet women in their 40s and 50s who are unmarried without children. And I only mention this because it's only been over the last few years when I've realized my mistake of not settling and starting a family a decade ago, whereas none of the women I meet in their 40s and 50s are able or have done the same, because I can only imagine the heartache reaching such a conclusion will entail. And so occasionally here on substack I come across refrains about women in their 60s who regret being single and childless, but this has yet to enter the zeitgeist unfortunately. The damage the extreme forms of feminism have done to women, and men, to societies across the West, I think we have barely started to realize and account for it. And unfortunately there's a lot of conspiracies, some which might be less conspiracy the more transparency is unearthed about the 60s (for instance, CIA funding new left magazines and counterculture), and I dare say a lot of toxic male views. That's why it's great to read a retrospective highlighting the more extreme views of feminism in the 60s.
Thanks again for writing, I learned a lot.
Thank you! The essay was originally much longer and with many more quotations from the texts in Rothenberg's course, but my husband said he felt the need to kill himself while I was only halfway through reading it to him, it was so repetitive and gruesome, so I shortened it.
Rape Culture in the west?
They don't know they are alive.
But if they have their way with their alliance with Islam they will discover such a thing, newly arrived, when Islam takes over
I recommend that everyone study Muslim doctrine to learn what a threat to the west it is and always has been,
and you should see that those who ally with it are useful idiots
Yes, agreed about Islam. A terrifying, repugnant supremacist ideology, and of course one that elicits great respect from the feminists.
A good example here is the continued resistance, by the feminist ministers in the labour government, to an "Inquiry" (in which a judge leads and evidence is given under oath) into the continuing 30 year old "Grooming Gangs" scandal. The latest twist being all the prominent victims (proven by the conviction in due process) on the advisory panel setting up the Inquiry resigning. Due to the Minister's (Jess Phillips) attempts to "dilute" the Racial and Cultural context. In effect feminists desperate to deny justice to girls and women (and boys actually) because there are the wrong sort of perpetrators and they couldn't care less about working class girls and women.
Yes.
Rape Culture was a seventies documentary/movie about the rape of males in institutions. Feminists later co-opted the language and concepts and distorted them to exclude those it was meant to help.
I did some research on Islamic Law because I kept seeing the memes about women's testimony value is 1/3 of a man's value.
1/3 is probably about right for Muslim women that grew-up hearing and maybe seeing false-witnessers stoned to death. So, the threat that keeps her more honest in those cultures.
But in the West women are immune to mercy and Justice, immune to Truth and Good-Order, to Loving Correction and so, some get sicker and sicker without limits.
So, their testimony value might be best set at 1/10 a man's value.
Each year this value can be adjusted based on recent Parental-Fraud metrics, False Rape metrics, perhaps other ways of sampling their [lack-of] virtue.
How can men's virtue be measured?
So, Islamic Law is much saner and more sensible about women. I never found the 1/3 value but I did read about 1/2 when testifying about sex. Men have zero value when subject is birth of babies, or other women-only related.
---
And now something completely different.
"Multiverse Journal - Index Number 2208:, 11th April 2025, Apologetics of Traditional Catholic Magisterium" https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-2208
---
God Bless., Steve
It has gravely changed men also. The whole Incel thing and the declining number of men having sex due to being intimidated by women and not trusting women. Feminists, while not running ads promoting porn have never been against it. One of the most degrading things a woman can do, but they promote it. Porn creates sexless males also. Even high school and College students are having much less sex. I am all for that for the right reasons, but young people are stuck in neutral, and confused about the nature of the opposite sex.
Movies continue to portray romance as fairly normal. I think a good twist would be a script about a feminist who inadvertantly realizes she is falling in love with a man and then questions the whole brainwashing she received. Turning Point as been a fairly successful in drawing women to the natural ideals of sex and marriage and realizing it is their path to fullfillment rather than feminism which thinks being an asshole and believing stupid things is the path to fulfillment.
Actually that is brilliant, some of the more conservative producers or whatever they're called need to make a movie like this or several of them. Also about women realizing they've been shortchanged and very much resenting what feminism taught them to believe.
You can watch 'The Bostonians' starring Christopher Reeve, written about by J. Fiamengo previously.
And a great novel, if one likes James' three-page paragraph, analyze-everything-to-death style. I happen to like it quite a bit. That novel still astounds me: how did he understand the entire issue so deeply? Incredible.
I recently bought the novel and it has taken its place in my never ending books pile. I'm familiar with James' 'taking the scenic route' style after reading a compendium of his ghost stories and 'Portrait of a Lady'; throughout the latter I wanted to shake the heroine by the shoulders and shout "Marry the handsome, rich young stud who loves you, you fool!".
Ole Henry never had much use for periods or paragraphs. Got in the way of the FLOW.
Thanks for exposing the evolution of women's studies. Palgrave published that book in 2008. By 2020 they published a book called The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Menstruation Studies (because everything is viewed through the lens of 'critical studies' today). There is a chapter called "Degendering Menstruation: Making Trans Menstruators Matter" and other contemporary wonders. This is referenced in a post about tampons and tech. https://margox.substack.com/p/tampon-truth?r=1kuq0
Wow. It just keeps going.
Like cancer.
Excuse the pun but "Degendering Menstruation: Making Trans Menstruators Matter" is bloody ridiculous!
Where is Tampon Tim on this? This is very funny and I think the women "studying" this line of teaching are falling further into their rabbit hole of despair. It can only be here as a purposeful plant from the left, Marxism or more likely just Satan.
It is unclear to me whether the governors, red or blue, have any clue as to what it is they support when they profess to support 'free tampons,' any more than the women do. Stupid comes in many forms and certainly the devil can be deceiving.
Thank you, as always, for your impressively insightful post! 💙
It's high time we started calling feminism extremism because that is precisely what it is. The whole ideology breeds hate — evil. It seems the exact opposite of religion.
Outstanding article. You have well identified the poisonous Marxist nature of the feminist movement. I think we can say they have proven successful in creating a large cohort of women who embrace a victim mentality and who are resentful and deeply unhappy.
They have done enormous damage to western society.
Thank you!
The left captured the means of cultural production and they still hold it: school media. Until that changes nothing changes. Millions of children are being a indoctrinated now.
“Karl Marx was not a man from the proletariat.
He was the son of a lawyer.
He did not have to work to go to the university.
He studied at the university in the same way as do the sons of well-to-do people today.
Later, and for the rest of his life, he was supported by his friend Friedrich Engels, who—being a manufacturer—was the worst type of "bourgeois," according to socialist ideas.
In the language of Marxism, he was an exploiter.” – Ludwig von Mises
Think about what is said here!