Female here who was suckered into a short romance with Woman's Studies in the 1990s. I agreed with the necessity of advanced personal agency for women that was achieved financially, educationally and legally, but then the train sped on past the station and exploded in the village which leaves me wondering if the net gain was really worth it. My instinct says no.
What we now see is a parasitic individualism with no insight into what actually sustains civilization and no foresight as to what happens without it. We, as women, have not only hamstrung the strength, nobility and responsibility of our men but have shamed and reduced ourselves into small, navel-gazing goddesses of enraged infantilism. It is grotesque and will end badly because it is fashioned from a lie. I thank God that my daughter bought into none of it and I am trusting that my sons will somehow navigate around it until the pendulum swings back and breaks the teeth of some of this nonsense. In the meantime, I wage war by rebuilding the foundation. Faith, family, community. There is only so much that political engagement will accomplish if we aren't proving them wrong with our very lives.
Except who says that the pendulum swinging back would be even a remotely fair outcome for men?
"Faith, family, and community" have been very clearly disdainful towards many men their entire lives, and to expect a smooth return to this vague traditionalism after a generation of open hostility is ignorant in the extreme. There's been decades of the same thankless toil, in addition to being treated like an oppressive power as part of some completely ahistorical ideology, and a willing blind eye to the realities of class, poverty, and war.
Personally, I don't long for a return to being seen as a workhorse or bodyguard. I don't want to be "respected within the community" only to be henpecked behind closed doors. I don't want to shoulder the burden of the material safety and survival of my family alone. I don't want to live up to a self-sacrificial ideal of a dead man who "gave everything".
What I want, at least, is to be listened to as part of a discussion as to what the role of men can and should be, and for my humanity to be acknowledged.
I hear what you have said and it is all very valid and eloquently expressed, thank you for your response. Traditionalism actually doesn't have any inherent healing power in itself, perhaps some stabilizing influence but it cannot hold if we are still ignoring the individuals who are being fed through the machinery like sausage meat, if we are only seeing each other through the lens of function and utility. I don't want that version of brokenness either. I want to see real healing, real honour, real restoration. It may not be possible with human wisdom or human affection but there is one whose sacrificial love made a way.
I respect your religious beliefs, but I think you may have missed my main point. The only way to stop and dismantle the meatgrinder is to actively listen to men. Real healing, honour, and restoration may mean something completely different to you than it does to me, or to the majority of men. Any improvement in society is a shared project, and I'm skeptical of any new vision of gender relations that doesn't at least give a hearing for men's viewpoints.
Men's voices and stories, all of them, are essential to that process. That is what honoring looks like in my eyes. Listening, acknowledging, respecting, welcoming, partnering with. It is going to take time but there are those of us who have seen what was done and we want better for you because you matter deeply and it is from a place of love that we want to see you flourish. Thank you again for your honesty, nothing real happens without it.
Very well said and spot on. I would just mention that your sons are already suffering great losses due to this train explosion and have little capacity to side-step the hatred.
I have one son who feels it especially keenly. Very little hope for building a future he wants to inhabit or trust to invite anyone to share it with him.
Advanced personal agency had also only been acheived off the back of affirmative action laws and discrimination against men in all of society starting in the mid 60s.
Women haven't really earned any of their "agency" as far as I'm concerned.
advanced personal agency for women has never been a necessity.
Women for more than 100 yrs have been able to be agentic and do whatever the hell they want. They've had the right to vote since 1920. They've had the ability to be financially indpendent if they wanted to for all of american history.
The truth is agency isn't something women care about, or have ever cared about. It's not something that's particularly important to society (unlike male agency), and women simply don't opt for it, given that being an agent requires sacrificing being endlessly doted on and women love being endlessly doted on. Women are even less happy than they used to be even though they supposedly have more "agency". Female independence is a giant myth, and most women aren't psychologically equipped to be independent in any meaningful regard.
The train sped on past the station when feminism began in 1846.
Thanks for painting this picture Janice. It ain't pretty but it is totally true. I loved this sentence!
"It’s not their alleged intelligence, nor their career-mindedness, nor their liberated determination to “fight back.” It’s their mean-spiritedness, selfishness, and bottomless self-love."
Amen.
I am beginning to wonder if we don't have a contagion of borderline personality disorder symptoms among feminist women...they are petrified of being abandoned...even by those they don't know! lol
Even the most misandrist lesbian blue haired feminists still require men as their source of narcissistic supply. The societal sex dynamics are only peripherally about personal romantic and sexual relationships.
I had to grow up trying to deal with feminism-inspired narcissistic rages which I'm sure were related to some sort of mental illness. I'm not sure whether the feminism causes the mental illness, or provides an excuse for it. I suspect the latter. I wonder what such women did before the advent of feminism. There is an interesting character in the Dickens novel "Great Expectations", Pip's sister and Joe's wife, who frequently goes on "rampages". I suppose nowadays she would be a raging feminist.
We used to have negative female archetypes that everyone knew and accepted. The scold or the Shrew, for example. Somehow our two female types became Mother Mary and Marilyn. The holy woman and the slut. Feminism stopped us looking at negative female energy as if it doesn’t exist. There is toxic make energy. But man! There also is toxic female energy. This needs to be acknowledged.
You caught me trying to soften things... It is amazing how the culture has literally trained women to act like this. I suppose men and boys would act like this too if they were never held accountable.
Tom, there is a concept that I believe may be extremely relevant, If anyone trawls back through copies of women's magazines and collects all the articles on dating advice, marriage advice and the psychological questionnaires a pattern would start to emerge on how women were being psychologically manipulated by these magazines.
I base my hypothesis on the Facial Scar experiment, where participants had a fake scar placed no their faces and as they left the room, the makeup artist under the guise of adjusting the scar removed it. The participants then interpreted other peoples body language differently.
But even before that a mate said his wife told him that she would feel unhappy after reading one of these magazines, his response was "Stop Reading them".
And if current research is to be believed more and more women are unhappy.
This is a great idea Phillip. Have you considered doing it? I was wondering about choosing10 random relationship recommendation articles from women's magazines between 1990 and the present and just start to get a sense of the main thrust of what is being recommended. I think it would tell a potent story. Then again, maybe choose one article every 3 years during that period to also get a sense of the changes over time. What a great idea!
I have considered doing, but I would need a couple of collaborators especially a psychologist to make sure I was on the right track. I am not always able to articulate what is inside my head, words or phrases at times do not come easy to me. I already have the title "The Psychological manipulation of the Female Mind".
'I suppose men and boys would act like this too if they were never held accountable.'
Good point Tom. My first thought on reading that was 'yes indeed' and then I thought of how overgrown, spoiled mummy's boys behave, which is just like that.
Yes, agree. Maturity and accountability are tied together. As a culture we apply this potion to aid maturity in such a sexist manner. The men and boys get it and the women and girls don't. When will feminists protest this travesty?
Jordan Peterson once said along the lines "The ideal age to train a soldier is between their late teens and early 20's".
I think it was something about melding them into a team, because after the early 20's it becomes much more difficult.
Comments about universities made 2 decades ago, is that Universities are turning out activists, as undergraduates become indoctrinated in Feminist Theory. So the graduates of Gender Studies that has invade Journalism, Psychology even Politics are only indoctrinated into the history of the world according to "Feminist Theory"
If we look at the current crop of Spin Sisters of the Media they have the Feminist Theory down pat on how they write and report news stories.
Yes, Peterson there says himself that he is relying on Piaget, who postulated a period of late adolescence called the 'messianic phase' when young people are most susceptible to offerings of anything that can give them as sense of personal transcendence, presumably helping to resolve earlier struggles with identity.
Tom, I don't think that it's actually self-love that these feminists have. Self-love is actually a healthy thing. What it is, rather, is selfishness, based on ego inflation and notions of moral superiority and consequent entitlement.
Definitely. And often driven by insecurities and feelings of inadequacy. Social media ignites a desire for "Likes" and an avoidance of ostracizing. Mental illness is well known to be widespread among extreme, hurtful feminists.
"... activism provides them with opportunities for positive self-presentation and displays of moral superiority, the gain of social status, the domination of others, and the engagement in social conflicts and aggression to satisfy their need for thrill seeking."
Thanks for linking these Ben. I have been interested in the Dark Triad research that seems to be related to these studies. This is so refreshing to see.
I read the whole paper, it is quite interesting. Psychologists seem to have developed useful metrics for measuring various forms of human behaviour, and they can associate these with the behaviour of "accusatory" feminists, the Charlotte Proudman type of person.
Many wo-MEN excuse other wo-MEN'S crimes due to PSTD/Post Partum depression/ADHD/Bi polar/under developed pre frontal cortex/ Are they inadvertently exposing their own gender as being less stable?
There was a movie "Mosquito Coast" I think where if I recall correctly William Hurt plays the part of a man obsessed, he is in the tropics and builds an ice machine, his obession leads him to wanting to take some ice to natives who had never seen it. After a long trek he finds the natives and carefully unwraps the leaves from the ice, only to find it had all melted and turned to water. I didn't understand the movie until I was explaining it to another person. He was so obssesed he didn't notice his family unraveling behind him.
That's what I meant Janice, ONLY out of a sense of duty...to see what we're up against, and only if I was still in high school. Again, THANK YOU for your sense of professional duty. It's good to be informed. As long as you have an outlet when you process what's happening
As far as I know, she is still working on her documentary film, which got derailed by Covid for a couple of years. I spoke to her about a year ago and she was still very committed to men's issues.
I would have loved to have been able to support her more financially, I did meet a person who was heading OS to make a documentary and I told him about her, not sure if he made contact, but it was worth a try.
Great topic, Janice. You are so right about the attitudes of Western women to men making this very rational decision to look elsewhere for a loving mate. But men should be warned. I have made a number of videos about immigration fraud, where Australian men have brought Asian women back to this country only to have them turn around and accuse them of domestic violence, which allows them an easy route to permanent residency. It is an absolute racket! See here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gXFYcw8MBI. Also read this story from Mothers of Sons - https://mothersofsons.info/mothers-stories/vimala/
The story about the Indian woman is a very sad story. It is surprising that the judge ruled in favour of her despite the witnesses and the mental health assessment.
One of the problems of marrying outside one's own culture is that it's more difficult to judge the other person's behaviour. For example erratic behaviour or other symptoms of mental illness might be dismissed as eccentricities due to the other person's culture. Apparently people with autistic spectrum disorders frequently marry outside their own culture, because the other person is much less likely to notice that their partner's behaviour is unusual.
The stereotype of the 'submissive' Asian woman seems to never die. They can't look beyond appearances. In Japan, for example, men may dominate in the public sphere, but women are entirely in charge in the private. Traditionally, they control everything domestic, including the household finances, Men usually hand over their entire pay packet to their wives every month. The wives then provide their husbands with an 'allowance' for daily expenses. Men, by and large, are worker drones who serve both corporate and domestic power. It is even difficult for a man to decide to not marry as that will have severe repercussions on his chances for advancement. A man who is not tied down at home is less likely to remain tied to the company he works for.
Japanese people aren't submissive, they are passive-aggressive, and drain your energy. I know a lot of successful marriages between Japanese and non-Japanese, but also a lot of utterly mad relationships seemingly based on romantic excitement about foreign people or very physically attractive people. I haven't met anyone who married a Japanese woman hoping she would be submissive, but such relationships may exist.
"Underneath the anger, there is perhaps a hint of fear. It’s not fear that men will leave the west in droves (they don’t see that happening yet, and neither do I), but it’s fear that men are not, after all, entirely under female control." Yes! Precisely. Feminists have convinced women that men are dangerous or useless without the bit in their mouths. Cannot have any mustangs galloping on the wide open prairies.
I think for some its the actual reality of the dependence on men, it is after all a man made and maintained world, and even the most "independent" feminist talks of "getting an man in" or "man with a van" when something needs fixing, building, installing etc. Indeed it entertained me to point this out to them.
In survey after survey "make me feel safe" is amongst the top qualities women seek from men (not on the list for men of course). One way to obtain this is to be appealing to such men, feminists ideology means they have to somehow order men to do this. In lieu of actually engaging in a relationship they are left with issuing orders.
Yes, I've even heard my (soon-to-be-ex) occasionally-raging, feminist partner say to our daughters words to the effect that they need men around to act as "bodyguards" when they're out at night - sacrificial ones I assumed.
To be honest I think the combination of "intersectionality" (the hierarchy of oppression) and obsession with "white men" means they simply don't see them. Either coming or doing all the "lowly" jobs that feminists simply imagine happen by a sort of magic. When it boils down to it their targets are comparatively well off and rich white men and sometimes uppity construction workers or others who dare to look up in their presence. I know in a number of european countries this is different but here given the blind eye given by feminists to the "grooming gangs" the fog of intersectionality and envy of successful men seems to blind them to anything that doesn't serve their enrichment.
The Polish women are apparently having migration problems too - now that tens of thousands of young Ukrainian war-widows are crossing the border looking for new husbands. And this migration wave has already begun to include single women too as Zelensky's plans to conscript women have been revealed.
That's definitely true. I think feminists see men as the ancient Romans saw slaves. Absolutely necessary for the economy, but always threatening to slip from their control.
One extremely strong association, is that a lot of women accuse men of for example being a "misogynistic" when it is the women themselves who are extremely angry and hostile towards men.
or
Claims being made that rich and powerful men are silencing women, when for decades people who tried to speak out for men were the ones who were really silenced.
The claim that women are being silenced is one of my favourites, along with the claim that women are being socially conditioned to accept traditional gender roles. Clearly nobody is being silenced, and if anything people are being socially conditioned away from traditional gender roles.
When I got married it was one of proudest days of my life. When I got divorced, I told people that to be a married man these days is to be a joke figure. When people ask me to describe marriage, I use one word : a humiliation. There is no incentive or reward in marriage for men in the Western world. This article touches on a lot of the reasons why.
Very well said Chris. I see every day before my very eyes and in HD detail, perfect examples of exactly what you described, with my father and my brother in law being abused and kicked like out of life doormats - in front of their children - by my mother and sister respectively. Makes me weep, for Christ8s sake.
I'm glad I'm out of it myself, but I see it all the time with other guys...in the park, at the shops, the pub - men being treated like sh*t by their wives and partners.
EXACTLY! Exactly that, sir. I see it all the time. I OBSERVE it, even. Because I’ve become so sensitive to it. It pains me endlessly.
And to be honest I am seeing way more of it also as regards mothers with their boys, believe it or not. To the point that one time I couldn’t help myself and I told the woman off for humiliating her boy in such a vile, potential-trauma-inducive manner! Then I patted him on the back and said “you’re ok, son, don’t worry, you did nothing wrong.”
Haha! Oh gosh…. If that had happened in Australia, I’d have been arrested for sure!
So if this sort of gynocentrism is inculcated - as it does - in men even at such an early age, it becomes even more difficult for them to do the due process of self-centering awareness and “liberation”.
I kid you not, I once overheard in a cafe a mother with a boy and a girl saying (I kid you not!): “I’m a mother! I have a duty to teach my daughter to respect herself, and teach my boy to respect women!”
I fucking kid you not.
Now imagine that woman’s concept reversed. All hell would break loose!
In the film Barbie, which I finally watched with gritted teeth and knot in stomach, there is a scene in which Ken breaks out of Barbie Land and goes into the real world. There he is allegedly shocked to discover that he is treated with respect simply for being a man (in Barbie Land, he is an irrelevant prop).
In a movie full of trivial, nauseous, propagandistic balderdash, I thought that was the silliest idea of all, that men are treated with respect simply for being men. But it is a widely-held feminist postulate, as shown by your story of the mother who never thinks she needs to treat her son to respect himself.
Looking back growing up I still remember being around women that were intent on emasculating me. I think it is better for boys and men to stay in a man's world and avoid that of women.
(When I was 11 years old) I had recurring apparitions/dreams/ about diving into a lake and rescuing a drowning girl, taking a bullet on the way down, wounded & all, swimming her to shore, only to have her get up and walk away with her girlfriends while giggiling, as I lay dying. Even as an 'ELEVEN' year old boy!!!!!! I felt like a martyr for Gynocentrism. I also believe devine inspiration informed me even as a child. Now that I'm a 66 year old MAN, I blame SIMPS even more than fEMINISM. MEN can change this tommorrow! 'WEAK MEN create unruly wo-MEN' (Alexis Tocqueville)
All of these entitlement issues among women these days flow from the basic error that feminists made in concluding that the history of the world was one of oppression of women by men. This cast women as innocent victims and men as guilty perpetrators, with the obvious corollary that women are morally superior to men. This notion of moral superiority is the relationship killer, the marriage killer, the caustic acid that destroys women's ability to respect men.
Women did it to themselves and to men, but it is truly sad how much we have lost and how deep is the suffering that flows from this ego inflation. Our culture is deeply dysfunctional, because the shadow side of women's power is out of control.
Enlightening. In particular your observation about perceived oppression “with the obvious corollary that women are morally superior to men.“
Thank you!
I’ve been wondering how the moral superiority aspect arose and was sustained and you’ve opened my eyes to the idea that it is part of the “payoff” of claiming victimhood. Which goes a long way to explaining the appeal of the intersectional approach to rights movements and feminism in particular - everyone empathises with and credits moral superiority to “victims”.
Of course many peoples of the world have all sorts of genuine challenges and reasons to call for support and visibility, but when 51% of the population of the safest, most prosperous and advanced cultures that have ever existed are determined to see themselves as some sort of “oppressed minority” surely the only sane response is laughter.
Laughter is one sane response, but perhaps a better one is grief at what we have lost (because authentic grief dissolves our anger) and a commitment to do what we can to make things right. That involves loving those afflicted, in the Christian "hate the sin but love the sinner" sense, and speaking truth in ways that enlighten rather than convict.
Thanks for the thoughtful response to my flippant ending. Indeed, rather sad laughter tinged with grief (“gallows humour”) is no substitute for lost possibilities - individually and communally.
I like to think I’m at least on the path to the generous commitment you described. I’ll keep those thoughts in mind. Thanks.
Speaking the truth assumes knowing the truth, too often, those chattering do not. This is and has been destruction of society by design, it is social engineering. Refer to the many evil satanic operatives networked to reduce humanity to mere cattle. The destruction of the family is one of many fronts in this attack on humanity by the globalist devils. "Everyman" must stand and fight, understanding what is true. If the sane do not act, we will be cattle!
It is true that most people do not understand what is true, but the discovery of the truth and the advance of truth in society has been men's great contribution to the development of the world. (Women's has been the advance of love, of empathy). Scientists, explorers, inventors of technology; these have overwhelmingly been men. But the discovery of truth is not easy, and there are many seductive traps to divert the seeker from his goal. Conspiracy theories, the need to put a human face to what afflicts us, to have somebody to blame, is one such. This, in my opinion, is the original motivation behind the development of religion - the ancients' need to create gods, personalities who were responsible for the devastations that life can inflict upon us.
Niether man nor woman has a monopoly on love, empathy, abuse or truth. Reality is sobering. Men and women live in different worlds by nature, desire, physical ability and societal imperatives. Minds poisoned by evil have created the world we live in now. It is all by design, it is "Structural Violence".
We have come to a very sad state, where men and women seem to have irreconcilably different opinions and expectations about male-female relationships, such as the people in your post seem to demonstrate. However, I suspect that things are not quite as bad in the "real world" as they are in the twitterverse. That is because I believe that people who post such things are actually outliers rather than the mainstream. I know not one so-called "passport bro," nor have I encountered their opposite numbers among the distaff occupants of my world. That may be due to my location in a rural part of the country, where more people than not go to church on Sunday and many still leave their cars and houses unlocked at night. Where parents allow their children to play outdoors without undue concern. Where people smile at one another in passing and often exchange innocuous pleasantries while waiting in line at the grocery or hardware store. Where people live in homes they own and keep up and in good repair and where neighbors help each other when the need arises. Where nearly everybody--females included--own and use firearms but have never engaged in violent behavior with them. I don't live in places where losers like the individuals featured in your post reside, which by-and-large are urban areas. I'm not sure whether living in a city causes peoples' mental problems or whether the arrow of causation runs the opposite way. All I know is that I avoid cities and I feel no diminution of quality of life as a result. I have three grandsons in their early thirties, all of whom have found mates from among the local female population. I would like to think they are the norm, rather than outliers.
Yes there is a whole world that isn't in thrall to feminism. Here its very much a "class" thing. There are 10 boroughs in my conurbation probably two have significant "metropolitan" populations the rest are irredeemably "northern" (British for blue collar and traditional). While more rural areas are "northern" and "backward" too!
The "real world "is worse than what you see in the movie "Needful Things". City or country, divorce lawyers destroy every community in a way much like the satanic Sydow character. I have seen it ! The poison spreads between the principle combatants to their families, neighbors and friends, too often erupting in violence and even murder. These caretakers of hell know damn well their role in the daily family court criminality.
Passport bros would have much better odds even with an asian prostitute then they would with a western woman, so long as they live in the country of their foreign wife.
I also have never met a passport bro. The online world does distort things. I don't think most women are the stereotypical feminist but most have been influenced by them through education and media.
Absolutely. It is absolutely so. And I speak from experience. And btw, why should I be ashamed of admitting it. On the contrary! I am happy to relay my experience, and grateful I can recount it among this community of surely very understanding peers.
I am super active in what Phillip up here calls “speaking up”, doing all I can in sharing info, research, sharing the good work of peeps such as Janice, regularly donating to the rare bastions of hope, such as Janice herself, Bettina Arndt, Mike Buchanan, and such likes. I probably dedicate 3 hours EVERY DAY doing all of that… but I do it anonymously! I have to! Ok I don’t HAVE to, but I’d be finished if I didn’t!
And how many, like me, are there out there, I wonder.
I simply cannot afford the cost that speaking up entails, would entail. Nor do I have the coping skills to do it, simply because the nazi feminist narrative where I live is so pervasive, so engrained, so unchallenged, that I would be immediately dismissed (and ostracized) as a psychopathic, women-hating weirdo.
Do I feel a coward? Not at all. Of course, my biggest dream is that of “coming out” and actually fully openly devoting my life (what remains of it) to speaking up about all this madness, becoming an actual champion of it and unleashing the full vigor of my passion and enthusiasm about this topic, because that would surely be more productive…. And the resulting courage would better help other men - since example is always the best channel of inspiration.
But I would definitely lose any work opportunities, as my field is so so deeply fucked up by nazi feminism.
Anyway, I digress. All I wanted to do is confirm what Phillip stated is damn bloody true, and offer a live example of it.
If I had said what I really believed when I had my second job interview in 2003, I would not have been hired. I was not an anti-feminist at that point, but I was certainly feminst-skeptic, and skeptical about all the progressivist assumptions regarding social justice, alleged white supremacy, the need to reject Eurocentrism, and so on. I didn't start saying what I believed, and then only carefully, until around 2010.
It has been since I have retired do I feel freer to speak my mind and explore the issues. I suspect until the internet came about many people who were sceptical of the Feminist claims felt that they were the only ones, suddenly the internet opens up new avenues for communication, as well as being a conduit for bullying behaviour of reputation destruction.
Isn't it funny how people used to have to "come out" about things which are totally normal, if not celebrated, today, but today have to come out about things which used to be totally normal in the past.
I don’t know brother. Maybe Twitter? I’ve said on there some of the things I’ve said here… at any rate, it’s a pleasure to read your contributions and i much appreciate you. Cheers
I actually know a few men who have totally given up on Australian women and head over seas. Sometimes just for romance, sometimes finding a life partner.
Australian women have embraced being able to shame and humiliate men with a gusto.
Looking at the recent pile on Russel Brand, Luis Rubiales and a number of Australian actors have had to face public humiliation because of unfounded accusations.
In order for men to be "Not that Guy" it means not approaching women in their own society for their own safety.
I'll probably end up in East or South East Asia. It's not just the feminism, but the climate cultism, romanticising of Aboriginals, vege/veganism, lack of grounding in traditional values, art, music, literature...
The article here a few weeks back about the Communist roots of feminism can be generalised to explain most of what is wrong with western culture today. It's 'long march' through our institutions was apparently a Fabian strategy. A recent article I read suggested there were still currently around 200 card-carrying Fabians in the British parliament today!
You can get the bookThe Long March by Marc Sidwell for free on the New Culture Forum website. He also recently did an excellent six part documentary celebrating the West, called The West. Also free.
And Marc was interviewed recently on Triggernometry, getting a huge viewing, probably because people are searching for reasons to feel good about their traditions and culture.
Another thing nobody questions when listening to this feminist rants is how utterly non congruent they are towards the foreign women who choose to marry these gentlemen: are those women oppressed by the bros? Are they priviliged? Aren't these women making their own choices? It's the same irony traditional women in the west experience when feminists start telling them how to live their lives. Then all of a sudden we are mutually dumb and oppressed ánd priviliged SAHM's.. They will not see any woman happy with a man. It confronts them with their own mess.
"it’s fear that men are not, after all, entirely under female control." Exactly. Essentially all of feminism is about increasing female control over males and their resources. The idea that there might be a backdoor to the prison they seek to build is more than they can stand. Patriarchal building codes! To admit, even for a second that the fault may lie at least partly with them would be to cede some control. Plus of course, women learned long, long ago that the way to gain control over men is to cry in fear or outrage, feigned or real. As long as they get cookies for doing so, they'll continue.
There is one plausible reason for the degree of open contempt expressed by these people; they require a large selection pool of potentially available mates. When eligible mates flee the candidacy, competition is reduced.
Without that competition, compromise increases. It's a classic power struggle, with all the attendant effort to maintain adversarial participation.
Female here who was suckered into a short romance with Woman's Studies in the 1990s. I agreed with the necessity of advanced personal agency for women that was achieved financially, educationally and legally, but then the train sped on past the station and exploded in the village which leaves me wondering if the net gain was really worth it. My instinct says no.
What we now see is a parasitic individualism with no insight into what actually sustains civilization and no foresight as to what happens without it. We, as women, have not only hamstrung the strength, nobility and responsibility of our men but have shamed and reduced ourselves into small, navel-gazing goddesses of enraged infantilism. It is grotesque and will end badly because it is fashioned from a lie. I thank God that my daughter bought into none of it and I am trusting that my sons will somehow navigate around it until the pendulum swings back and breaks the teeth of some of this nonsense. In the meantime, I wage war by rebuilding the foundation. Faith, family, community. There is only so much that political engagement will accomplish if we aren't proving them wrong with our very lives.
I can picture Clementine Ford getting chinned by a pendulum.
Well done! You are a strong minded person and have passed down your genes. It gives one hope!
Except who says that the pendulum swinging back would be even a remotely fair outcome for men?
"Faith, family, and community" have been very clearly disdainful towards many men their entire lives, and to expect a smooth return to this vague traditionalism after a generation of open hostility is ignorant in the extreme. There's been decades of the same thankless toil, in addition to being treated like an oppressive power as part of some completely ahistorical ideology, and a willing blind eye to the realities of class, poverty, and war.
Personally, I don't long for a return to being seen as a workhorse or bodyguard. I don't want to be "respected within the community" only to be henpecked behind closed doors. I don't want to shoulder the burden of the material safety and survival of my family alone. I don't want to live up to a self-sacrificial ideal of a dead man who "gave everything".
What I want, at least, is to be listened to as part of a discussion as to what the role of men can and should be, and for my humanity to be acknowledged.
I hear what you have said and it is all very valid and eloquently expressed, thank you for your response. Traditionalism actually doesn't have any inherent healing power in itself, perhaps some stabilizing influence but it cannot hold if we are still ignoring the individuals who are being fed through the machinery like sausage meat, if we are only seeing each other through the lens of function and utility. I don't want that version of brokenness either. I want to see real healing, real honour, real restoration. It may not be possible with human wisdom or human affection but there is one whose sacrificial love made a way.
I respect your religious beliefs, but I think you may have missed my main point. The only way to stop and dismantle the meatgrinder is to actively listen to men. Real healing, honour, and restoration may mean something completely different to you than it does to me, or to the majority of men. Any improvement in society is a shared project, and I'm skeptical of any new vision of gender relations that doesn't at least give a hearing for men's viewpoints.
Men's voices and stories, all of them, are essential to that process. That is what honoring looks like in my eyes. Listening, acknowledging, respecting, welcoming, partnering with. It is going to take time but there are those of us who have seen what was done and we want better for you because you matter deeply and it is from a place of love that we want to see you flourish. Thank you again for your honesty, nothing real happens without it.
Very well said and spot on. I would just mention that your sons are already suffering great losses due to this train explosion and have little capacity to side-step the hatred.
I have one son who feels it especially keenly. Very little hope for building a future he wants to inhabit or trust to invite anyone to share it with him.
Yes, understand this very well, but he has a mother who is aware and is supporting him and that is a Godsend that most don't have. Blessings.
Thank you for that. 💖
Excellent point and superbly put. You indeed have a way with words
Advanced personal agency had also only been acheived off the back of affirmative action laws and discrimination against men in all of society starting in the mid 60s.
Women haven't really earned any of their "agency" as far as I'm concerned.
advanced personal agency for women has never been a necessity.
Women for more than 100 yrs have been able to be agentic and do whatever the hell they want. They've had the right to vote since 1920. They've had the ability to be financially indpendent if they wanted to for all of american history.
The truth is agency isn't something women care about, or have ever cared about. It's not something that's particularly important to society (unlike male agency), and women simply don't opt for it, given that being an agent requires sacrificing being endlessly doted on and women love being endlessly doted on. Women are even less happy than they used to be even though they supposedly have more "agency". Female independence is a giant myth, and most women aren't psychologically equipped to be independent in any meaningful regard.
The train sped on past the station when feminism began in 1846.
It doesn't matter if that's true, that just means she disagrees with US culture.
And capitalism isn't a virtue, it's just a functional system.
Cornball.
Leftists can't divorce anything from morality, no matter how robotic and amoral something actually is.
Nobody thinks capitalism is a fucking virtue. You're corny
Thanks for painting this picture Janice. It ain't pretty but it is totally true. I loved this sentence!
"It’s not their alleged intelligence, nor their career-mindedness, nor their liberated determination to “fight back.” It’s their mean-spiritedness, selfishness, and bottomless self-love."
Amen.
I am beginning to wonder if we don't have a contagion of borderline personality disorder symptoms among feminist women...they are petrified of being abandoned...even by those they don't know! lol
Even the most misandrist lesbian blue haired feminists still require men as their source of narcissistic supply. The societal sex dynamics are only peripherally about personal romantic and sexual relationships.
A cat won't let a mouse escape from its play.
What do mean a contagion?
I strongly suspect that the vast majority have some form of personality disorder.
They would much prefer to be outraged and experiences the rush of hormonal releases that occur after the berserker rage settles down.
Even Janice herself said when she took part in the "Take back the night" protests that it felt good.
I had to grow up trying to deal with feminism-inspired narcissistic rages which I'm sure were related to some sort of mental illness. I'm not sure whether the feminism causes the mental illness, or provides an excuse for it. I suspect the latter. I wonder what such women did before the advent of feminism. There is an interesting character in the Dickens novel "Great Expectations", Pip's sister and Joe's wife, who frequently goes on "rampages". I suppose nowadays she would be a raging feminist.
We used to have negative female archetypes that everyone knew and accepted. The scold or the Shrew, for example. Somehow our two female types became Mother Mary and Marilyn. The holy woman and the slut. Feminism stopped us looking at negative female energy as if it doesn’t exist. There is toxic make energy. But man! There also is toxic female energy. This needs to be acknowledged.
You caught me trying to soften things... It is amazing how the culture has literally trained women to act like this. I suppose men and boys would act like this too if they were never held accountable.
It's not just not being held to account. Women are rewarded for this shit.
Tom, there is a concept that I believe may be extremely relevant, If anyone trawls back through copies of women's magazines and collects all the articles on dating advice, marriage advice and the psychological questionnaires a pattern would start to emerge on how women were being psychologically manipulated by these magazines.
I base my hypothesis on the Facial Scar experiment, where participants had a fake scar placed no their faces and as they left the room, the makeup artist under the guise of adjusting the scar removed it. The participants then interpreted other peoples body language differently.
But even before that a mate said his wife told him that she would feel unhappy after reading one of these magazines, his response was "Stop Reading them".
And if current research is to be believed more and more women are unhappy.
That would be a fascinating study (but you'd need an iron stomach).
This is a great idea Phillip. Have you considered doing it? I was wondering about choosing10 random relationship recommendation articles from women's magazines between 1990 and the present and just start to get a sense of the main thrust of what is being recommended. I think it would tell a potent story. Then again, maybe choose one article every 3 years during that period to also get a sense of the changes over time. What a great idea!
Great ideas, Tom!
Thanks Janice, the credit goes to Phillip.
Wonder if I could score some funding to do it?
If you could frame it in terms of studying women it might be possible to get some funding? Otherwise, ain't no way.
I have considered doing, but I would need a couple of collaborators especially a psychologist to make sure I was on the right track. I am not always able to articulate what is inside my head, words or phrases at times do not come easy to me. I already have the title "The Psychological manipulation of the Female Mind".
In the past magazines contained explosives. Nowadays they still do, but in a different way when it comes to the glossy ones.
An anagram of 'magazines is 'Nazi games'. No surprises there then.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-associated-press-became-part-nazi-propaganda-machine-180958629/
'I suppose men and boys would act like this too if they were never held accountable.'
Good point Tom. My first thought on reading that was 'yes indeed' and then I thought of how overgrown, spoiled mummy's boys behave, which is just like that.
Yes, agree. Maturity and accountability are tied together. As a culture we apply this potion to aid maturity in such a sexist manner. The men and boys get it and the women and girls don't. When will feminists protest this travesty?
Jordan Peterson once said along the lines "The ideal age to train a soldier is between their late teens and early 20's".
I think it was something about melding them into a team, because after the early 20's it becomes much more difficult.
Comments about universities made 2 decades ago, is that Universities are turning out activists, as undergraduates become indoctrinated in Feminist Theory. So the graduates of Gender Studies that has invade Journalism, Psychology even Politics are only indoctrinated into the history of the world according to "Feminist Theory"
If we look at the current crop of Spin Sisters of the Media they have the Feminist Theory down pat on how they write and report news stories.
The Gamma Bias at play.
Yes, Peterson there says himself that he is relying on Piaget, who postulated a period of late adolescence called the 'messianic phase' when young people are most susceptible to offerings of anything that can give them as sense of personal transcendence, presumably helping to resolve earlier struggles with identity.
Tom, I don't think that it's actually self-love that these feminists have. Self-love is actually a healthy thing. What it is, rather, is selfishness, based on ego inflation and notions of moral superiority and consequent entitlement.
Definitely. And often driven by insecurities and feelings of inadequacy. Social media ignites a desire for "Likes" and an avoidance of ostracizing. Mental illness is well known to be widespread among extreme, hurtful feminists.
I saw this:
'Evidence for the Dark-Ego-Vehicle Principle: Higher Pathological Narcissism Is Associated With Greater Involvement in Feminist Activism'
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4195431
on Twitter yesterday.
https://twitter.com/Gynocentrism/status/1705443867171140089
There's a quote I like in the article:
"... activism provides them with opportunities for positive self-presentation and displays of moral superiority, the gain of social status, the domination of others, and the engagement in social conflicts and aggression to satisfy their need for thrill seeking."
Does that sound like anyone we know?
Thanks for linking these Ben. I have been interested in the Dark Triad research that seems to be related to these studies. This is so refreshing to see.
I read the whole paper, it is quite interesting. Psychologists seem to have developed useful metrics for measuring various forms of human behaviour, and they can associate these with the behaviour of "accusatory" feminists, the Charlotte Proudman type of person.
It is a bit dense reading though.
Many wo-MEN excuse other wo-MEN'S crimes due to PSTD/Post Partum depression/ADHD/Bi polar/under developed pre frontal cortex/ Are they inadvertently exposing their own gender as being less stable?
Indeed Joseph. Reminds me of the Barbie movie!
I can't fathom myself watching it unless I smoke a big one and go back to high school
Do not watch! I watched out of a sense of professional duty, and found it very painful.
There was a movie "Mosquito Coast" I think where if I recall correctly William Hurt plays the part of a man obsessed, he is in the tropics and builds an ice machine, his obession leads him to wanting to take some ice to natives who had never seen it. After a long trek he finds the natives and carefully unwraps the leaves from the ice, only to find it had all melted and turned to water. I didn't understand the movie until I was explaining it to another person. He was so obssesed he didn't notice his family unraveling behind him.
That's what I meant Janice, ONLY out of a sense of duty...to see what we're up against, and only if I was still in high school. Again, THANK YOU for your sense of professional duty. It's good to be informed. As long as you have an outlet when you process what's happening
Thanks! Tom and I will discuss; also, I am going to see if I can make something of it for this newsletter.
Are you, perchance, writing a review?
Ava Brighton said it out loud, and I haven't heard a word about her since.
As far as I know, she is still working on her documentary film, which got derailed by Covid for a couple of years. I spoke to her about a year ago and she was still very committed to men's issues.
I would have loved to have been able to support her more financially, I did meet a person who was heading OS to make a documentary and I told him about her, not sure if he made contact, but it was worth a try.
re "...bottomless self-love." Does this mean they don't love their bottoms? :)
That would explain a lot!
That's the fault of the patriarchy too.
I have a personal story about this but I will not bore you with it ...
Oh do, I like being bored! But it is late here in UK so I really ought to go to bed.
In any event, thank you for all you do.
Great topic, Janice. You are so right about the attitudes of Western women to men making this very rational decision to look elsewhere for a loving mate. But men should be warned. I have made a number of videos about immigration fraud, where Australian men have brought Asian women back to this country only to have them turn around and accuse them of domestic violence, which allows them an easy route to permanent residency. It is an absolute racket! See here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gXFYcw8MBI. Also read this story from Mothers of Sons - https://mothersofsons.info/mothers-stories/vimala/
The story about the Indian woman is a very sad story. It is surprising that the judge ruled in favour of her despite the witnesses and the mental health assessment.
One of the problems of marrying outside one's own culture is that it's more difficult to judge the other person's behaviour. For example erratic behaviour or other symptoms of mental illness might be dismissed as eccentricities due to the other person's culture. Apparently people with autistic spectrum disorders frequently marry outside their own culture, because the other person is much less likely to notice that their partner's behaviour is unusual.
What kind of idiot would bring a good woman back into the West?
That's like placing nice ripe fruit among rotten fruit and wondering why it goes rotten.
You do like I did, and move there, not bring the girl back home!
Different cat, same litterbox.
Janice, thank you for writing the most insightful article I've ever read on this issue, by a country mile.
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
The stereotype of the 'submissive' Asian woman seems to never die. They can't look beyond appearances. In Japan, for example, men may dominate in the public sphere, but women are entirely in charge in the private. Traditionally, they control everything domestic, including the household finances, Men usually hand over their entire pay packet to their wives every month. The wives then provide their husbands with an 'allowance' for daily expenses. Men, by and large, are worker drones who serve both corporate and domestic power. It is even difficult for a man to decide to not marry as that will have severe repercussions on his chances for advancement. A man who is not tied down at home is less likely to remain tied to the company he works for.
Here's a cautionary tale about a man seeking submissive Asian women, not about Japan though:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/25/ron-fanelli-wanphen-pienjai-poker
Japanese people aren't submissive, they are passive-aggressive, and drain your energy. I know a lot of successful marriages between Japanese and non-Japanese, but also a lot of utterly mad relationships seemingly based on romantic excitement about foreign people or very physically attractive people. I haven't met anyone who married a Japanese woman hoping she would be submissive, but such relationships may exist.
That domestic financial situation was the subject of one my readings when I studied some Japanese at university.
Though I've also heard about Japanese men who will get home from work earlier than their wife, then wait for her to come home and cook dinner.
"Underneath the anger, there is perhaps a hint of fear. It’s not fear that men will leave the west in droves (they don’t see that happening yet, and neither do I), but it’s fear that men are not, after all, entirely under female control." Yes! Precisely. Feminists have convinced women that men are dangerous or useless without the bit in their mouths. Cannot have any mustangs galloping on the wide open prairies.
I think for some its the actual reality of the dependence on men, it is after all a man made and maintained world, and even the most "independent" feminist talks of "getting an man in" or "man with a van" when something needs fixing, building, installing etc. Indeed it entertained me to point this out to them.
In survey after survey "make me feel safe" is amongst the top qualities women seek from men (not on the list for men of course). One way to obtain this is to be appealing to such men, feminists ideology means they have to somehow order men to do this. In lieu of actually engaging in a relationship they are left with issuing orders.
Yes, I've even heard my (soon-to-be-ex) occasionally-raging, feminist partner say to our daughters words to the effect that they need men around to act as "bodyguards" when they're out at night - sacrificial ones I assumed.
But these feminists are the ones who are happy to see thousands and thousands of young men illegally crossing the channel and Med.
To be honest I think the combination of "intersectionality" (the hierarchy of oppression) and obsession with "white men" means they simply don't see them. Either coming or doing all the "lowly" jobs that feminists simply imagine happen by a sort of magic. When it boils down to it their targets are comparatively well off and rich white men and sometimes uppity construction workers or others who dare to look up in their presence. I know in a number of european countries this is different but here given the blind eye given by feminists to the "grooming gangs" the fog of intersectionality and envy of successful men seems to blind them to anything that doesn't serve their enrichment.
The Polish women are apparently having migration problems too - now that tens of thousands of young Ukrainian war-widows are crossing the border looking for new husbands. And this migration wave has already begun to include single women too as Zelensky's plans to conscript women have been revealed.
That's definitely true. I think feminists see men as the ancient Romans saw slaves. Absolutely necessary for the economy, but always threatening to slip from their control.
One extremely strong association, is that a lot of women accuse men of for example being a "misogynistic" when it is the women themselves who are extremely angry and hostile towards men.
or
Claims being made that rich and powerful men are silencing women, when for decades people who tried to speak out for men were the ones who were really silenced.
The claim that women are being silenced is one of my favourites, along with the claim that women are being socially conditioned to accept traditional gender roles. Clearly nobody is being silenced, and if anything people are being socially conditioned away from traditional gender roles.
When I got married it was one of proudest days of my life. When I got divorced, I told people that to be a married man these days is to be a joke figure. When people ask me to describe marriage, I use one word : a humiliation. There is no incentive or reward in marriage for men in the Western world. This article touches on a lot of the reasons why.
Very well said Chris. I see every day before my very eyes and in HD detail, perfect examples of exactly what you described, with my father and my brother in law being abused and kicked like out of life doormats - in front of their children - by my mother and sister respectively. Makes me weep, for Christ8s sake.
I'm glad I'm out of it myself, but I see it all the time with other guys...in the park, at the shops, the pub - men being treated like sh*t by their wives and partners.
EXACTLY! Exactly that, sir. I see it all the time. I OBSERVE it, even. Because I’ve become so sensitive to it. It pains me endlessly.
And to be honest I am seeing way more of it also as regards mothers with their boys, believe it or not. To the point that one time I couldn’t help myself and I told the woman off for humiliating her boy in such a vile, potential-trauma-inducive manner! Then I patted him on the back and said “you’re ok, son, don’t worry, you did nothing wrong.”
Haha! Oh gosh…. If that had happened in Australia, I’d have been arrested for sure!
So if this sort of gynocentrism is inculcated - as it does - in men even at such an early age, it becomes even more difficult for them to do the due process of self-centering awareness and “liberation”.
I kid you not, I once overheard in a cafe a mother with a boy and a girl saying (I kid you not!): “I’m a mother! I have a duty to teach my daughter to respect herself, and teach my boy to respect women!”
I fucking kid you not.
Now imagine that woman’s concept reversed. All hell would break loose!
:’(
Luca, I have no trouble believing that.
In the film Barbie, which I finally watched with gritted teeth and knot in stomach, there is a scene in which Ken breaks out of Barbie Land and goes into the real world. There he is allegedly shocked to discover that he is treated with respect simply for being a man (in Barbie Land, he is an irrelevant prop).
In a movie full of trivial, nauseous, propagandistic balderdash, I thought that was the silliest idea of all, that men are treated with respect simply for being men. But it is a widely-held feminist postulate, as shown by your story of the mother who never thinks she needs to treat her son to respect himself.
Looking back growing up I still remember being around women that were intent on emasculating me. I think it is better for boys and men to stay in a man's world and avoid that of women.
(When I was 11 years old) I had recurring apparitions/dreams/ about diving into a lake and rescuing a drowning girl, taking a bullet on the way down, wounded & all, swimming her to shore, only to have her get up and walk away with her girlfriends while giggiling, as I lay dying. Even as an 'ELEVEN' year old boy!!!!!! I felt like a martyr for Gynocentrism. I also believe devine inspiration informed me even as a child. Now that I'm a 66 year old MAN, I blame SIMPS even more than fEMINISM. MEN can change this tommorrow! 'WEAK MEN create unruly wo-MEN' (Alexis Tocqueville)
All of these entitlement issues among women these days flow from the basic error that feminists made in concluding that the history of the world was one of oppression of women by men. This cast women as innocent victims and men as guilty perpetrators, with the obvious corollary that women are morally superior to men. This notion of moral superiority is the relationship killer, the marriage killer, the caustic acid that destroys women's ability to respect men.
Women did it to themselves and to men, but it is truly sad how much we have lost and how deep is the suffering that flows from this ego inflation. Our culture is deeply dysfunctional, because the shadow side of women's power is out of control.
Enlightening. In particular your observation about perceived oppression “with the obvious corollary that women are morally superior to men.“
Thank you!
I’ve been wondering how the moral superiority aspect arose and was sustained and you’ve opened my eyes to the idea that it is part of the “payoff” of claiming victimhood. Which goes a long way to explaining the appeal of the intersectional approach to rights movements and feminism in particular - everyone empathises with and credits moral superiority to “victims”.
Of course many peoples of the world have all sorts of genuine challenges and reasons to call for support and visibility, but when 51% of the population of the safest, most prosperous and advanced cultures that have ever existed are determined to see themselves as some sort of “oppressed minority” surely the only sane response is laughter.
Laughter is one sane response, but perhaps a better one is grief at what we have lost (because authentic grief dissolves our anger) and a commitment to do what we can to make things right. That involves loving those afflicted, in the Christian "hate the sin but love the sinner" sense, and speaking truth in ways that enlighten rather than convict.
Thanks for the thoughtful response to my flippant ending. Indeed, rather sad laughter tinged with grief (“gallows humour”) is no substitute for lost possibilities - individually and communally.
I like to think I’m at least on the path to the generous commitment you described. I’ll keep those thoughts in mind. Thanks.
Speaking the truth assumes knowing the truth, too often, those chattering do not. This is and has been destruction of society by design, it is social engineering. Refer to the many evil satanic operatives networked to reduce humanity to mere cattle. The destruction of the family is one of many fronts in this attack on humanity by the globalist devils. "Everyman" must stand and fight, understanding what is true. If the sane do not act, we will be cattle!
Read the script:
https://www.unz.com/book/anonymous__the-protocols-of-the-learned-elders-of-zion/
It is true that most people do not understand what is true, but the discovery of the truth and the advance of truth in society has been men's great contribution to the development of the world. (Women's has been the advance of love, of empathy). Scientists, explorers, inventors of technology; these have overwhelmingly been men. But the discovery of truth is not easy, and there are many seductive traps to divert the seeker from his goal. Conspiracy theories, the need to put a human face to what afflicts us, to have somebody to blame, is one such. This, in my opinion, is the original motivation behind the development of religion - the ancients' need to create gods, personalities who were responsible for the devastations that life can inflict upon us.
Niether man nor woman has a monopoly on love, empathy, abuse or truth. Reality is sobering. Men and women live in different worlds by nature, desire, physical ability and societal imperatives. Minds poisoned by evil have created the world we live in now. It is all by design, it is "Structural Violence".
Understand the plan:
https://www.unz.com/book/anonymous__the-protocols-of-the-learned-elders-of-zion/
Like Tyler Durden says: narcissists. But narcissists that are encouraged by the 'controlled' media.
We have come to a very sad state, where men and women seem to have irreconcilably different opinions and expectations about male-female relationships, such as the people in your post seem to demonstrate. However, I suspect that things are not quite as bad in the "real world" as they are in the twitterverse. That is because I believe that people who post such things are actually outliers rather than the mainstream. I know not one so-called "passport bro," nor have I encountered their opposite numbers among the distaff occupants of my world. That may be due to my location in a rural part of the country, where more people than not go to church on Sunday and many still leave their cars and houses unlocked at night. Where parents allow their children to play outdoors without undue concern. Where people smile at one another in passing and often exchange innocuous pleasantries while waiting in line at the grocery or hardware store. Where people live in homes they own and keep up and in good repair and where neighbors help each other when the need arises. Where nearly everybody--females included--own and use firearms but have never engaged in violent behavior with them. I don't live in places where losers like the individuals featured in your post reside, which by-and-large are urban areas. I'm not sure whether living in a city causes peoples' mental problems or whether the arrow of causation runs the opposite way. All I know is that I avoid cities and I feel no diminution of quality of life as a result. I have three grandsons in their early thirties, all of whom have found mates from among the local female population. I would like to think they are the norm, rather than outliers.
Yes there is a whole world that isn't in thrall to feminism. Here its very much a "class" thing. There are 10 boroughs in my conurbation probably two have significant "metropolitan" populations the rest are irredeemably "northern" (British for blue collar and traditional). While more rural areas are "northern" and "backward" too!
You don't know passport bros (I am one) because, you know, we LEFT.
The "real world "is worse than what you see in the movie "Needful Things". City or country, divorce lawyers destroy every community in a way much like the satanic Sydow character. I have seen it ! The poison spreads between the principle combatants to their families, neighbors and friends, too often erupting in violence and even murder. These caretakers of hell know damn well their role in the daily family court criminality.
Passport bros would have much better odds even with an asian prostitute then they would with a western woman, so long as they live in the country of their foreign wife.
I also have never met a passport bro. The online world does distort things. I don't think most women are the stereotypical feminist but most have been influenced by them through education and media.
Who are these losers you refer to?
Your piece brought tears. I'm sad for all the lonely, psychologically battered men. They stay quiet, for fear of more vengeance.
Janice's writtings are pure wisdom.
There is a huge cost to speaking up. Some people simply do not have the coping skills to do it.
Absolutely. It is absolutely so. And I speak from experience. And btw, why should I be ashamed of admitting it. On the contrary! I am happy to relay my experience, and grateful I can recount it among this community of surely very understanding peers.
I am super active in what Phillip up here calls “speaking up”, doing all I can in sharing info, research, sharing the good work of peeps such as Janice, regularly donating to the rare bastions of hope, such as Janice herself, Bettina Arndt, Mike Buchanan, and such likes. I probably dedicate 3 hours EVERY DAY doing all of that… but I do it anonymously! I have to! Ok I don’t HAVE to, but I’d be finished if I didn’t!
And how many, like me, are there out there, I wonder.
I simply cannot afford the cost that speaking up entails, would entail. Nor do I have the coping skills to do it, simply because the nazi feminist narrative where I live is so pervasive, so engrained, so unchallenged, that I would be immediately dismissed (and ostracized) as a psychopathic, women-hating weirdo.
Do I feel a coward? Not at all. Of course, my biggest dream is that of “coming out” and actually fully openly devoting my life (what remains of it) to speaking up about all this madness, becoming an actual champion of it and unleashing the full vigor of my passion and enthusiasm about this topic, because that would surely be more productive…. And the resulting courage would better help other men - since example is always the best channel of inspiration.
But I would definitely lose any work opportunities, as my field is so so deeply fucked up by nazi feminism.
Anyway, I digress. All I wanted to do is confirm what Phillip stated is damn bloody true, and offer a live example of it.
If I had said what I really believed when I had my second job interview in 2003, I would not have been hired. I was not an anti-feminist at that point, but I was certainly feminst-skeptic, and skeptical about all the progressivist assumptions regarding social justice, alleged white supremacy, the need to reject Eurocentrism, and so on. I didn't start saying what I believed, and then only carefully, until around 2010.
It has been since I have retired do I feel freer to speak my mind and explore the issues. I suspect until the internet came about many people who were sceptical of the Feminist claims felt that they were the only ones, suddenly the internet opens up new avenues for communication, as well as being a conduit for bullying behaviour of reputation destruction.
Isn't it funny how people used to have to "come out" about things which are totally normal, if not celebrated, today, but today have to come out about things which used to be totally normal in the past.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Do I know you, I get a sense that I do.
I don’t know brother. Maybe Twitter? I’ve said on there some of the things I’ve said here… at any rate, it’s a pleasure to read your contributions and i much appreciate you. Cheers
Use a pen name and make your arguments, stand without fear and expose this disgusting culture. Let the chips fall where they may.
I actually know a few men who have totally given up on Australian women and head over seas. Sometimes just for romance, sometimes finding a life partner.
Australian women have embraced being able to shame and humiliate men with a gusto.
Looking at the recent pile on Russel Brand, Luis Rubiales and a number of Australian actors have had to face public humiliation because of unfounded accusations.
In order for men to be "Not that Guy" it means not approaching women in their own society for their own safety.
I'll probably end up in East or South East Asia. It's not just the feminism, but the climate cultism, romanticising of Aboriginals, vege/veganism, lack of grounding in traditional values, art, music, literature...
The article here a few weeks back about the Communist roots of feminism can be generalised to explain most of what is wrong with western culture today. It's 'long march' through our institutions was apparently a Fabian strategy. A recent article I read suggested there were still currently around 200 card-carrying Fabians in the British parliament today!
Search Online Opinion for Bitter Sweet Harvest James Hickey
Have you read Bitter Harvest by Peter O'Brien, Phillip? It pulls Dark Emu to pieces. There's also the website Dark Emu Exposed.
I am looking forward to the one about The Conversation.
You mean the opinion website The Conversation? It's a cousin of The Atlantic, Huff Post and The Guardian, isn't it?
No I haven't and I will look into it thanks
There's also Michael Connor's The Invention of Terra Nullius. I remember being taught the Terra Nullius fiction at Wollongong Uni 20 yrs ago.
Truth telling is a big fat bundle of lies.
Fabian = WEF
You can get the bookThe Long March by Marc Sidwell for free on the New Culture Forum website. He also recently did an excellent six part documentary celebrating the West, called The West. Also free.
And Marc was interviewed recently on Triggernometry, getting a huge viewing, probably because people are searching for reasons to feel good about their traditions and culture.
There are indeed.
Another thing nobody questions when listening to this feminist rants is how utterly non congruent they are towards the foreign women who choose to marry these gentlemen: are those women oppressed by the bros? Are they priviliged? Aren't these women making their own choices? It's the same irony traditional women in the west experience when feminists start telling them how to live their lives. Then all of a sudden we are mutually dumb and oppressed ánd priviliged SAHM's.. They will not see any woman happy with a man. It confronts them with their own mess.
"it’s fear that men are not, after all, entirely under female control." Exactly. Essentially all of feminism is about increasing female control over males and their resources. The idea that there might be a backdoor to the prison they seek to build is more than they can stand. Patriarchal building codes! To admit, even for a second that the fault may lie at least partly with them would be to cede some control. Plus of course, women learned long, long ago that the way to gain control over men is to cry in fear or outrage, feigned or real. As long as they get cookies for doing so, they'll continue.
"As long as they get cookies for doing so, they'll continue" Spot on.
"They cry out in pain as they strike you"
There is one plausible reason for the degree of open contempt expressed by these people; they require a large selection pool of potentially available mates. When eligible mates flee the candidacy, competition is reduced.
Without that competition, compromise increases. It's a classic power struggle, with all the attendant effort to maintain adversarial participation.