Poor western white women how terrible it must be to educated and overly valued

White women throughout the world and online are apparently championing their fight for civil rights. Sounds silly right, well its beyond silly its fucking hysterical! Really though how many people have seen white women every truly oppressed? When white women marched and set fire to things in the UK back in the early 1900s it was their husbands and fathers that took the blame for them it was very rare for a suffragette to even get arrested. Only a few of the more violent women were arrested. This arrest however was far from anything a man would face. Oddly even if these women admit their privilege don’t expect them to make it something objective so much as victimizing of themselves. Yes I am calling “patriarchy” a conspiracy theory. I mean really it is, you have the three needed pillars of a conspiracy. It divides the good and the bad clearly and makes the good guys the under dog. In this case feminists label themselves the under dog despite their the dominant social ideologies of our time, they receives millions (directly and indirectly) of dollars in government funding and has more lobbying power than any other social movement including the President of the United State Barrack Obama. The two others are rather obvious the skin deep patriarchy is generally accepted as the Us president is a man, but no meaningful evidence of a global male conspiracy oppressing women exists! Finally Latour’s assertion that a “conspiracy theory” is largely derived from Marxist inspired theory. Oddly almost all feminist thoughts and actions are inspired directly from Marxism and Anarchism. So if the Patriarchy was real in the feminist mentioned ways then why is it women, and in result feminists turn out to be the numerical majority of all things good. Women live longer have more medical research and treatment option then men and despite controlling 88% America’s 1% they only pay a fraction of the taxes men pay and only work in the white collar world largely because the opertunities in American are largely reserved for women, most often white women of Feminism.

The Core

Lets understand the beginning yes the very beginning of whiny white women is the very beginning of feminism. It started with Suffrage, and I don’t seen any black or Hispanic women. Don’t believe what I am saying, well here we are several images all about the Suffrage movement. Look at the white women in white marching, such brave strong women, yeah no more like privileged rich women with nothing to do. I mean literally throughout nations like Africa, South America and across Native American cultures Patriarchy did exist, but that never meant women had no poweror choice as most feminist declare. For feminism destroying the Patriarchy is their single unifying lynch pin, even if it is nothing more than a myth at best and more often a bogus Conspiracy theory as I have already mentioned.

Where the non white women were

The life of women in Africa was more matrilineal, they contributed to the economy in equal numbers as the men. While hunting was a mainstay for meat it was not the main food, men would often fish farm and even do so with the help of their wives and daughters. This of course was long before the Dutch and British slavers. Hell Native American women worked side by side with the men while the tribes were over all run by men it was heavily influenced by women. When white settlers appeared in the New World the fact women were working is what made the Native Americans appear to be savages. After all they had created a system to pamper their women as ladies or consumers of products.

In the New world the British established a heavy reliance on slavery. So a man in Africa would soon be no more than a pack animal. He couldn’t marry or keep his family together nor could he prevent or exact justice when his wife and daughter were raped. In the mean time the master’s wife and or daughters would sit around fanning themselves and playing dress up with their slaves. So in the end they really had very few issues about having their sexuality oppressed or abused.

With the people we now call Hispanic they lived in a Patriarchy although their power in society was not like a stay at home mom they had to prove their ethics and their value of their to a man. They were never allowed to go from pampered daughters to pampered wives. They proved their skills as farmers or at handling game and medical practices of the tribe. While men went through their passages of manhood the girls had to study and learn trades to become a woman worthy of marriage and a valuable tribe member.

Now it must also be noted, lest you think this is strictly a white vs. non-white dynamic. I’m trying to establish. Its not, Eastern European white women of today can’t adopt the western feminist narrative either because communism also saw them “liberated” from traditional gender roles. This is far from true unless you mean only from gender roles, and not actual freedom. So when western white women were whining about patriarchy the women of the East were probably to busy working. It was this very fact that they and other women (native american, Hispanic and African Americans) would not see traditional gender roles as something not so oppressive or harmful.

Now for the women I just mentioned the way a white woman lived in the 1950s and 1960s was something very rare for a black man to be able to provide. In fact not many white women even cared for their own homes or children.

In the south and across America the wealthy white women who made second wave feminism often paid black women to raise their children, clean the home their husband paid for, and cook the food for the husband and his wife. I honestly wonder how many of the black women that served these women could ever adopt feminism? The feminists were treating them just barely better than a slave cutting their pay if they used the toilets they kept clean. How could these women buy into Patriarchy if the men they saw were coming home every day to a woman that couldn’t even be bothered to cook him dinner? The man’s wife pays no attention to his child or home. From the place of a white woman and from the black woman is it any wonder why feminist or racial animosity between the two is more tense than white men and black men? The White Generation Y men grew up the Children of the lazy entitled feminist women, and the minorities grew up watching these spoiled white women whine about women’s rights so long as the woman was white and well off of course. So now we are in the generation of Attachment parenting.

The List of White women

Andrea Dworkin

Valerie Solanas

Robin Morgan

Susan Brownmiller

Sally Miller Gearhart

Catherine Comins

Jessica Vallenti

Germaine Gree

Clarie Sargent

Faith Whittlesy

The entire writing staff of Jezzeble

Shirley Chisholm

Anita Sarkeesian

Well that’s as many feminist I can list and yes they are all western gender feminists. As for Feminism as we know it today, is a middle/upper-class white, western female supremacist group with many members dedicated to killing all the men or at the very least making us into less than human. Feminists focus their energy on minimizing the value of traditional gender roles and on the promotion of unrealistic gender superiority of the poor opressed white women. The fact their cause was founded on the status those women elite women that enjoyed, and continue to enjoy living the most well-protected, pampered, adored, and privileged life, and it is designed largely to inflict serve problems upon to those who serve them.


“Male disposability” theory, made popular by GirlWritesWhat, is not a proper model to explain how males in specific areas of society may be disadvantaged.  It is a viable model at the population level, but not the individual level, and does not take life history strategies into account, which are crucial to understand male-female sexual selection and the evolution of behaviors often termed “gender roles”.

Male disposability theory posits that females are less disposable than males because they are the limiting factor in population growth, and that males are disposable because a single male is capable of inseminating numerous females.  This makes sense when you consider r-selected species (species that produce numerous offspring and little to no parental care).  However, in K-selected species (species that produce few offspring and provide a great deal of parental care, like humans), male disposability theory falls apart because, at the population level, both males andfemales limit population growth optima.  Males with such life-history strategies typically contribute to the reproductive success of their partners by providing direct benefits such as nest guarding, feeding young, and so forth.  Therefore, if the male in a mating pair were to run off or be eaten, the reproductive success of the pair would be critically compromised.

She does touch on anisogamy a bit as a method to explain why females are more “valuable” to populations, but does not further continue to explain that life-history strategy in humans has evolved to accommodate females due to the massive amount of energy and risk invested in reproduction (9-month incubation periods, risk of maternal mortality during childbirth ect.).  She notes that the importance societies placed on women was necessary for their survival, but neglects to mention that both females and males provide critical services for each other in such survival conditions.  An argument could be made that population growth dynamics have made favored the evolution of a mating system that provisions for females and children due to population dynamics.  But GirlWritesWhat does not mention that such provisioning for both children and mothers is in the best interests of males as well, if said male wishes to propagate his genes over multiple generations.   In short, males have always been important, especially in K-selected species like humans.

menvs women

Its often a subject of intense debate, how radicals have tainted the feminist movement. I’ve seen many feminists respond to this with simple dismissals at best when anyone requests the ousting a few radicals. Upon such questions towards removing them feminists have taken defensive positions and stated,

You can’t actually kick someone out of a movement. You can kick them out of an organization, but that doesn’t stop them from identifying as feminist, or starting their own organization. Plus, I’ve learned from experience that if you spend all your time getting your movement down to just the people you want, you don’t actually meet any of your goal. So they’ve “kicked them out” by identifying as people who care about equality and woman’s rights.

Honestly that isn’t really the case, now I have see the response to comments like the one above with the following

Education equality like how feminists and the state believe women making up over 60% of college students isn’t enough? Gender stereotypes like the kind which say that all men are rapists, pedophiles, and abusers [link] So basically, because NAFALT, we should not speak out against all the harm feminism has done to society, is that right? [link][link] [link] [link] If your friends don’t like people thinking that they’re misandrist, tough. Your feminism isn’t the kind taught in gender studiescourses, the kind influencing family law, the kind which influence UN aid agencies which provide aid only to women.

There only response to issues in the United States is to go aboard, re-frame the issue and change the geographical region in question as seen bellow,

The entire world isn’t the United States of America, nor is it entirelycollege graduates. Don’t you remember Malala Yousafzai, the girl who was shot in the head for being vocal and wanting to go to school? Or what about the girls in countries who get married at 13, and even if they were in school before they have to drop out? You responded to a very specific part of my post,and took it out of context to boot. I wrote education for all and equality, which they take to mean things like advocating for laws that would raise the amount of money public schoolsget, and improving working conditions.
Calling feminism, and by extent all my feminist friends, harmful to society because of a few people you don’t like, is like calling white people racists because of the Klu Klux Klan. You’re against a very specific group of people calling themselves feminists but you’re attacking the group as a whole.

By now you’ve noticed a trend, the feminist keeps mentioning things to debate yet provides no evidence to support any of her claims. When men’s issues in the USA come up with overwhelming evidence that it is in fact the fault of feminism, the feminist promptly moves abroad. Change the subject and resorts to petty insults. I honestly don’t know how many times I’ve seen threats of murder, rape, castration, torture, and the ever popular “Fuck you”.

Most feminists aren’t willing to even admit that there’s a problem, but the few that do tend to ask a simple question: “how do we fix it?” This is for you guys.

Being me, brutally honest my opinion is that for the most part feminism has long since missed its chance at salvation. To prove my point Christina Hoff Sommers attempted to do this very thing a few times and was promptly labeled anti-woman by other feminists. However, I am magnanimous on hope as well so please take these given suggestions, to heart:

  • Feminist academia. The biggest reserves of bigotry, it’s been a sanctuary for radscum, and it’s creating much of the….academically suspect research that the bigots in the rest of the movement feed on, in addition to creating bigotry in people who aren’t themselves bigots, but ignorant of the facts. Commit yourselves to finding accurate information and getting accurate results, even if those contradict the things you believe. Lies only fuel distrust and give ammunition to your opposition.
  • Most of what feminist think they know is the product of the aforementioned radicalsThis includes about 90% of the statistics that most feminists “just know” are true. Rape, the wage gap, domestic violence, glass ceiling, you name it, there are serious problems with the existing research. Myth and lies do not help your legitimacy.
  • Attack the radicals when and where you can. When radscum hold a conference, or vent their bigotry in public, fight back and condemn their actions . Even most of the nastier MRAs do genuinely want equality, they just default to tactics similar to the earlier waves of feminism because the MRM is now where you guys were then. A handful of nutballs managed to pull together almost a hundred people for a screaming, angry mob to protest Warren Farrell, one of the least objectionable guys in existence. Don’t tell me you can’t do better for people who are far, far worse than even the the worst lies regarding Dr. Farrell.
  • For More things to do see the following lists

Put this list together, and mainstream feminism shall deny radfems their refuge in academia, mainstream media, and the world in general. The radicals will share the status of the KKK and Neo Nazis. The rejection their “research” and “statistics” terms used loosely as their work is largely inaccurate over 90% of the time. Seriously Feminists stop letting them walk around unopposed, worked with other people seeking equality to demonstrate your commitment to it, they won’t stick around for bigotry for long. Radicals must be denied leadership positions pretty much every where. They won’t be able to keep claiming your support when every time they speak they have to do it over a chorus of “we don’t support you”, especially when they can no longer use you to cover their own expenses you will look a lot less culpable for their actions.

The day when you can genuinely say that you [your feminist organization] works towards and ideally succeeds at all of these, true Egalitarians will have no quarrel with you. We may think you’re idealistic, but idealistic is a much better than appearing hypocritical.

So its been a while, I admit but lets take a look at what the “Good Man Project” is up to, ah curing the psychiatric problems of fictional men. Really as if men struggling with a sex addiction are in short supply. If anyone with a desire to truly help men with any of the many institutional discrimination men endure daily its not GMP.

    1. Gross judicial inequity against men.  (Being black raises the chance of incarceration after arrest ~20%, being male raises it over 150%.  In addition, sentences are often up to 40% shorter for women than men, even for the same crime.)
    1. Gendered/sexed military service requirements.  (I’ve got no objection to service requirements, but everybody has to be in line for the same thing.)
    2. Men accounting for virtually all workplace deaths.
    3. False accusations of rape which depending on the study range from few but problematic to absolutely rampant.
    4. De jure sexism in IPV (domestic violence) laws which apply different standards to men and women.  (VAWA etc.)
    5. Cultural bias of “women as victims” leading to the belief that men can’t be raped or abused, let alone by women. 
    6. Cultural prejudice against men operating in a child-rearing capacity whether in the home or workplace.
    7. De jure sexism in divorce courts, including the misuse of restraining-order laws originally intended to protect women.
    8. Sexism with regards to both child-support and alimony laws.
    9. Lack of judicial resources to combat paternity fraud, and lack of mechanisms for victims to remove improperly-applied CSOs and sue for reimbursement.
    10. Prejudices in (particularly early) education against boys and educational programs that consistently cater to stereotypically female styles of learning.
    11. Societal standards which simultaneously force men to approach women then condemn them for doing so.
    12. Societal standards which encourage or force men to financially support women without sensible cause.
    13. Acceptance of negative media portrayals of men, where such a portrayal would not be acceptable of a woman.
    14. Lack of good media role models for young men.
    15. Pressure on men to conform to stereotypes destructive to both themselves and others, whether that of the “good man” who subordinates himself to others or of the “bad boy” who engages in behavior harmful to himself and others.
    16. Disregard for the reproductive rights of men, and the attitude that consent to sex equals consent to procreation.
    17. The treatment of all men as potential or actual rapists, pedophiles et cetera.
    18. The current face of feminism that’s less about gender equality than it is about bashing men.
    19. The notion of “patriarchy” as something “by men, for men” rather than an overarching problem which affects men and women in relatively equal and opposite ways, caused originally by biological roles rather than any conscious choice by anyone.

    Instead no the so called “What about the Menz” types common to the GMP are more concerned about Don Draper’s sex addiction? While yes it is induced by the fact he was raped by a postitute at the depression era whore house he lived in as a teen boy this is a realty for thousands of men. I mean maybe if these feminist actually took their heads out of their asses and visited http://www.malesurvivor.org/ these men need all the help they can get and they are disadvantaged enough as is when it comes to being abused by women. I mean to say misplaced intentions is an understatement. I mean not only is she trivializing things she is only telling half the story to boot. No where in her article does she even mention why Don is addicted to sex, she doesn’t even acknowledge the fact Don is in fact  Richard “Dick” Whitman. A Korean War enlisted soldier that swapped tags with a Lt Don Draper. Is it a surprise feminism isn’t taken seriously? I mean focusing on fiction over reality in almost as many ways as possible not only through lies but by imagining themselves as therapists to people that NEVER EXISTED!  Yes Madmen is a nice show with well made characters but there are countless men and boys that are victims of abuse women. If feminists want to be treated with any amount of respect then it needs to rethink its actions, over the past 20 years and correct them by ousting bigots and morons. The Good man project is to far gone and to much of an over grown masochist gathering ground for emasculated and self loathing men.


In order:

  1. Claim: Women perform 66% of the world’s work, but receive only 11% of the world’s income, and own only 1% of the world’s land.
    Reality: Not a single portion of this claim is verifiably true, and two of the three are verifiably false.  Regardless of whether we use “property” (as the original) or “land” (inaccurate to the original claim, but slightly more believable), we can confirm that women own more than one percent of it worldwide, and women in the U.S. alone earn almost 10% of the world’s income.  The original source of these statistics?  Literally outright guesswork.
  2. Claim: Women make up 66% of the world’s illiterate adults.
    Reality: While this initially appears similar to the statistic (#8) debunked here, this version is actually accurate.  Nonetheless, for context, it’s important to note that gendered illiteracy is a regional problem, not a global one.  As discussed here and here, Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia alone account for 75% of all illiterate adults worldwide.  This means that it’s a much more localized problem than is implied, and one that has to be dealt with on a regional basis.
  3. Claim: Women head 83% of single-parent families. The number of families nurtured by women alone doubled from 1970 to 1995 (from 5.6 million to 12.2 million).
    Reality: While this may also be accurate, it is presented in a very misleading fashion.  First, while this is supposedly a list of “Facts about Women Around the World” this statistic clearly originates from the U.S. alone.  In the U.S, of the 12.2 million single parent families in 2012, slightly more than 80% were headed by single mothers.  (USCB)  This clearly does not present a world-wide view.  Second, this statistic entirely ignores the reasons for the disparity.  To wit, the disparity is a combination of discrimination against men in family law (leading to disproportionate female custody during divorce), and high levels of voluntary single motherhood.
  4. Claim: Women account for 55% of all college students, but even when women have equal years of education it does not translate into economic opportunities or political power.
    Reality: While the statistic is true, what follows is not.  First, the statistic confuses economic opportunities with economic results.  Second, it ignores disparities in choice of educational focus.  Third, it conflates political achievement with political power.  Fourth, this is also U.S.-specific, saying nothing about “women around the world” at all.

    Virtually all the evidence we have points to individual choice, not discrimination, as the root cause of the gender wage disparity.  Women have economic opportunity, but because most don’t take it few see economic results.  One factor is the choice of major: despite women being the majority of university students they primarily dominate unmarketable majors, whereas (despite no evidence of discrimination by universities) men dominate majors which normally lead to high economic outcomes.  The problem with “political power” is similar.  Women are the majority of citizens in most first-world nations, and an even greater majority of voters.  (This not withstanding, some studies suggest that women are more likely than men to be what’s termed “low-information voters.”)  In a democracy, that’s about the only kind of power that exists besides lobbying and various forms of vote-buying.  The clear intention of the quote is to speak to the lack of women in politics and infer from that some level of discrimination against women.  The reality is that women are just as likely to reach political office as men, when they run.  Most do not, mirroring the choices we see regarding economic factors.  Most importantly, in-group bias factors leave little reason to believe male-dominated government is evidence of government discrimination against women.  (A suggestion: compare the three most pro-women politicians to the thirty most pro-men politicians and see where you end up.)  Lack of political achievement is no evidence of lack of political power, something a casual look at modern politics should easily show.  

  5. Claim: There are six million more women than men in the world.
    Reality: This is just plain factually inaccurate.  The current world population disparity is much closer to ten times that, around 60 million.
  6. Claim: Two-thirds of the world’s children who receive less than four years of education are girls. Girls represent nearly 60% of the children not in school.
    Reality: As discussed in point 2, gender-based educational disparities are primarily regional, localized to the Middle-East and Africa.  While these numbers may or may not be accurate, they’re definitely somewhat misrepresented.
  7. Claim: Parents in countries such as China and India sometimes use sex determination tests to find out if their fetus is a girl. Of 8,000 fetuses aborted at a Bombay clinic, 7,999 were female.
    Reality: While it is true that sex-selective abortion occurs around the world, the numerical evidence presented is purely anecdotal.  This is used to inflate the perception, even though the sex disparity in abortion is far less dramatic.
  8. Claim: Wars today affect civilians most, since they are civil wars, guerrilla actions and ethnic disputes over territory or government. 3 out of 4 fatalities of war are women and children.
    Reality: This is wrong in about every possible way.  According to the Iraq Body Count and other figures virtually all military deaths were men, and women and children combined made up only 20% of civilian victims.  Note the weasel words here: women and children.  This is a common tactic used to inflate the numbers (as children are both male and female), but it’s also misogynist (painting women as children) and erasing/misandrist (men are “acceptable” victims).

    Of those 20%, roughly half were children, meaning that women made up at most about 10% of identifiable victims.  Among child deaths identifiable by sex, roughly two-thirds were male.  Out of 20,770 deaths identifiable by both sex and age, men and boys made up 18,498  For the record, this means that the overall civilian victim ratio is 89.1% men and boys to 10.9% women and girls, almost 10 to 1.  (The reason this doesn’t match the earlier 20% figure is that only 40% of child victims were known to be male or female, excluding a large portion from the gender calculation.)

    As one academic study concluded, “Our demographic analysis shows that Iraqi civilian men are the main civilian victims of lethal armed violence in this war, as in other wars, despite having the same protected civilian status as women and children civilians under laws of war.”  (Emphasis added.)

    Could it be that Iraq just has an aberrant gender distribution of fatalities?  Not likely.  One interesting finding of the IBC was that different forms of weaponry have distinctly different gender fatality distributions.  In particular, guns are the most discriminate (particularly in cases of abduction and torture, described as a “particularly appalling form of death”), leading to primarily male victims.  Air attacks and mortar fire were the most even-handed, killing close to equal numbers of men and women.  (Note that not a single weapon type was found to kill more women than men, with the highest ratio being 46% for air attacks.)

    The reason this is important to recognize is that mortar fire and air attacks are mostly limited to high-level conflicts like those in Iraq and Afghanistan, where they’re deployed primarily by countries such as the United States.  In fact, Coalition forces accounted for a disproportionate number of female deaths: 15.0% as compared to 4.1% of male deaths.  In comparison, Anti-Coalition forces accounted for 25.8% of male deaths and only 8.7% of female deaths.  Unknown perpetrators accounted for the remainder, killing men and women roughly equally.  Guerrilla actions, some civil wars and ethnic disputes, on the other hand, rarely involve the kinds of weaponry deployed by coalition forces in Iraq.  This makes higher levels of civilian female deaths in other conflicts highly unlikely.

    Women are not now and have never been the majority victims of war and conflict.

  9. Claim: Rape is consciously used as a tool of genocide and weapon of war. Tens of thousands of women and girls have been subjected to rape and other sexual violence since the crisis erupted in Darfur in 2003. There is no evidence of anyone being convicted in Darfur for these atrocities.
    Reality: Rape is indeed consciously used as a tool of genocide and weapon of war.  However, it is not a gendered one, and it’s known to affect both men and women.  The difference?  Female victims receive high levels of aid both internal (to the nation/conflict) and external (UN aid, etc.), whereas male victims receive little to none.  In some cases, agencies have even been threatened with defunding if they served too many male victims.  This combined refusal to acknowledge the existence of male conflict rape and refusal to provide aid to victims leads to consistent underreporting and world-wide ignorance of the problem.
  10. Claim: About 75% of the refugees and internally displaced in the world are women who have lost their families and their homes.
    Reality: While this is true, it might be worth considering the “why” of the matter.  See, the single biggest reason women are the majority of the displaced is that the men who would have been displaced are, well, dead.  The Rwandan genocide was a perfect example.  While the majority of the displaced were women and their children, it was only because their husbands and fathers had been murdered.  Which position would you rather be in?
  11. Claim: Gender-based violence kills one in three women across the world and is the biggest cause of injury and death to women worldwide, causing more deaths and disability among women aged 15 to 44 than cancer, malaria, traffic accident, and war.
    Reality: This doesn’t even contain the grain of truth most lies have.  The first half is addressed in point 9 here, and the second half is addressed here.  Neither of these claims have any basis in reality, something that should be obvious to anyone with a basic knowledge of statistics and some common sense.

 Some of these facts are accurate and some are total bull, but none of them are presented in a manner that is truly forthright.  Regional problems are represented as world issues, U.S. numbers are implied to be world figures, opportunity is confused with outcome and, well, the rest isn’t even close.

Try again.

Well today I just got my very first death threat here at Facts for equality. If you wish to know about  the threat just visit the previous post before this. Now if you want to know about her well here it is…

IP address Information

Residence: Jacksonville Florida 

She even uses Comcast as her internet provider.

Now to address her claims, of powerless women, tell me how is being the majority voter in every single election equal powerless? I mean the United States is a Federal Republic the voters more or less hold power. So men clearly don’t hold any true power since women can easily vote the men in office out via what is called “impeachment”. 


Feminist male-perpetration patriarchy theory shares many characteristics with what most people would describe as “conspiracy theories.”  It would not, in our eyes, be terribly unreasonable to describe many formulations thereof as being close enough to warrant the label.  (Weasel words, yes, but important ones.)

When we look at conspiracy theories, there are a few key elements.  The first is extremely high-level efficient covert organization, the “shadowy cabal” so to speak.  The second is the clear division of the world into “good” and “bad” elements, creating an inherent moral simplicity and tracing all “evil” (so to speak) back to the supposed conspirators.  The third is the concept of overwhelming odds, the idea that the “whistleblower” group is inherently fighting an asymmetric battle against a vastly superior foe.  Two other characteristics are often (but not always) present: the argument of antiquity (ancient conspiracy), and the lack of factual or evidentiary support.  (The latter is generally present, but one example of a factually-supported conspiracy would be Watergate.)  There are many other common characteristics, but we’d describe these ones as the “core” of what makes a conspiracy theory what it is.

So does male-perpetration patriarchy theory meet these criteria?  We [Masculists]would argue that the answer is probably “yes.”

The first criteria is the most obvious: patriarchy theory, in essence, makes the claim that since before the beginning of recorded history men as a class have conspired to subjugate women, have succeeded almost completely and universally, and have done so without any evidence of such a conspiracy ever coming to light. They’ve succeeded at doing this despite (for most of history) having no way to communicate with each other over the wider world, and have never (to current knowledge) been overthrown in any major society.  The second isn’t hard to see either.  Male-perpetration patriarchy theory neatly divides the world into an “oppressed” and an “oppressor” group, which are conveniently split along sex/gender lines.  Virtually all the evil in the world can be ascribed to the “patriarchy,” which in context is basically equivalent to “men.”

So what about the “underdog” viewpoint?  Frankly, it’s not hard to see either.  Feminism is one of the dominant social ideologies of our time, receives millions (directly and indirectly) of dollars in government funding, and has more lobbying power than any other social movement we can think of.  It’s wrought incredible change on our society, both for the better and (all-too-often) for the worse, and it’s been steadily gaining influence throughout the last five decades.  Despite this, many feminists basically claim that nothing’s changed, that society is still completely against them and that they’re a small group of valiant freedom fighters rather than an extremely well-funded lobby industry feared by pretty much everyone.  Feminism, in short, ignores its own power and influence.

The remaining two are pretty simple.  The “patriarchy” is generally accepted as coming from antiquity, no meaningful evidence of a global male conspiracy to oppress women, and much feminist evidence regarding the current status of women and men is severely tainted.

Latour’s assertion that conspiracy theorism is to a degree derived from Marxist-inspired critical theory is particularly interesting given the context, as that same theory is a pretty fundamental part of most modern feminism.  Surprising?  Not really.  This is something that has in the past affected a number of human rights movements.  Most, however, have largely outgrown it.  Feminism, unfortunately, has not.

Have you ever given any thought as to why feminism is a bad word? I could honestly sit here all day and quote feminism’s founders and leaders. I will quote them, but first of all one must also look at the actions of feminism. Sitting around all day and quoting the feminist war machine is a far too simple argument to be the only force in debunking the myth of Patriarchy.

“All men are rapists and that’s all they are.” 
Marilyn French, Author; (later, advisor to Al Gore’s Presidential Campaign.)

“We live, I am trying to say, in an epidemic of male violence against women.” 
Katha Pollitt.

“All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman.” 
Catherine MacKinnon

“I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He’s just incapable of it.” 
Former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan.

“The traditional flowers of courtship are the traditional flowers of the grave, delivered to the victim before the kill. The cadaver is dressed up and made up and laid down and ritually violated and consecrated to an eternity of being used.” 
Andrea Dworkin

“The media treat male assaults on women like rape, beating, and murder of wives and female lovers, or male incest with children, as individual aberrations…obscuring the fact that all male violence toward women is part of a concerted campaign.” 
Marilyn French

“Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.” 
Germaine Greer.

“Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.” 
Catherine Comin, Vassar College. Assistant Dean of Students.

“Men renounce whatever they have in common with women so as to experience no commonality with women; and what is left…is one piece of flesh a few inches long, the penis. The penis is the man; the man is human; the penis signifies humanity.” 
Andrea Dworkin

“You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs.”
Catherine MacKinnon (Prominent legal feminist scholar; University of Michigan, & Yale.)

“Man-hating is everywhere, but everywhere it is twisted and transformed, disguised, tranquilized, and qualified. It coexists, never peacefully, with the love, desire, respect, and need women also feel for men. Always man-hating is shadowed by its milder, more diplomatic and doubtful twin, ambivalence.” 
Judith Levine

“Men’s sexuality is mean and violent, and men so powerful that they can ‘reach WITHIN women to fuck/construct us from the inside out.’ Satan-like, men possess women, making their wicked fantasies and desires women’s own. A woman who has sex with a man, therefore, does so against her will, ‘even if she does not feel forced.’ 
Judith Levine, (explicating comment profiling prevailing misandry.)

In this list you not only see hate quotes from feminist leaders you also see their positions within the United States government, as well as some of the world’s most respected educational institutions in history. Is it any wonder men are not enrolling in college when their professors are such hateful bigots. The group called NOW with its 550,000 plus feminists have been waging a war against father’s rights.

What is so terrible about father’s having rights feminism? Yes I am addressing every single feminist alive on this question. If you wonder why I’ll tell you, the view this bill which will assist fathers in low income status to have money to use to aid their children. NOW calls it a trickle down economic scam. Despite the fact they Support the VAWA which is actually a far larger waste of money. Oddly the majority of American women are completely inept and should be kept as far from their children as possible.

Feminism is the work place

In modern time we have women and men working together; however, this isn’t because women are doing all they can to work hard and prove their equality to men. Feminists have the common attitude that women shouldn’t have to fight for everything they accomplish in life, this is of course the way men get around in the work place. Most women are psychologically unfit to handle the rigors of the work place. There are two types of work place sexual harassment from what I’ve seen, one the “sleep with me or lose your job” and the other is hostile work environments.

Men when working in any setting are almost always likely to abuse, intimidate, and degrade other men. These are a repertoire of competitive tactics employed by men in competitive situations. Feminism has earned itself the title of a bad word when these tactics are used on women in a competitive work place. How is it not equality when a man treats a woman the way he treats a man?

I just love to imagine for a moment what work would be like with women in the office, and these women are compelled to actually do their jobs, because they lack sex discrimination legislation to force employers to hire them. No sudden backlog because a co-worker has to take time off to look after her child who caught the flu at his day care center. No random outbursts of emotion because you failed to anticipate a working woman’s delicate feelings. No worrying that a casual joke will result in accusations of “sexual harassment”.

Of course feminist argue that women can’t afford not to work in modern times. This is true but the reality is that this is their fault. They created a mythical wage gapscreaming equal pay for equal work. Oddly the issue of pay was that married men made more money than an unmarried man. This was what America’s labor unions had created shortly after world war 2 to rebuild America’s family unit. The average Blue collar worker in 1960s could easily provide for a family. After feminism created the equal pay for equal work wage gap myth this came to an end and saw a massive rise in inflation. Women started getting bombarded by a new role made by feminism. The new free woman could work and have a family, this inflated prices of things like houses and cars by dragging naive women into the workplace, sellers were free to base their prices on the two-income family.

False Rape Culture

Feminist believe in a mythical land called rape culture where all men are taught to rape and that rape is a rewarded behavior. As for the roles of men and women, in this culture all the men are rapists and all women are victims. Feminist retard Anita Sarkeesian on her youtube series states proudly that false rape accusation are dangerous fallacies as only 2% of rapes charges are false, as women don’t wish to face the humiliation of a man’s right to due process. She says this time and again even though police departments across the country report that 45% of their rape cases are false, this is a monthly number by the way.

Feminist claim that women have no reason to lie about being raped. The reality is that women have plenty of reason to lie about rape most of the time a woman will be paid in money or some for of legal trade for being a rape victim. The most recent case is that of Brian Banks a high school football star who was once one of the most highly sought after athletes in the nation. He has had a rape charge against him dropped after the woman confessed on Facebook that the rape never happened. Thanks to feminism, the lying whore Wanetta Gibson, and their media fools Brian Banks, who is now 26-years old, and spent six years in prison for a woman’s lie has no wide spread media coverage and is still labeled a sex offender for a crime he never committed.

After charges against him were dropped Brian broke down in tears “There are no words in any language, no gesture in any culture that can explain or describe what I have been through,” said Banks. “I hope my story brings light to a major flaw in the judicial system.”

Sadly for Banks the feminists are claiming this is a mere mistake on the Justice system’s part and has nothing to do with the lying whore Wanetta Gibson that received 1.5 billion dollars for accusing him of rape. Before this whore ruined him Banks was a football star with dreams of playing in the NFL, and even had several leads. He was only 16 when the woman accused him of kidnapping and raping her at school. The woman, Wanetta Gibson, added him as a friend on Facebook and in a message said she wanted to “let bygones be bygones”. There is one very good reason why a woman would lie about rape, she will get millions of dollars if she can get a man convicted of a crime.

When Feminists get the chance to change a legal definition of rape.

MRAs and egalitarians have also been crowing about it, for somewhat different reasons: for the first time, thanks to feminism this new definition acknowledges that men can be raped.

But does it, really? Well, sort of. Let’s look at the possible cases of “rape” in the definition. Penetration, penetration, penetration. All three cases require penetration. Let’s actually make a chart comparing what is and isn’t rape if it happens to one sex or the other, presuming the attacker is a member of the opposite sex.

Act Female Male

Forced Heterosexual Intercourse Rape Not Rape
Forced Oral (Giving) Rape Possibly Rape*
Forced Oral (Recieving) Possibly Rape* Not Rape
Forced Manual (Giving) Not Rape Not Rape
Forced Manual (Recieving) Rape Not Rape
Forced Anal (Giving) Not Rape Not Rape
Forced Anal (Recieving) Rape Rape

*For men, being forced to give oral would potentially count if any portion of the woman’s genitals entered his mouth assuming they considered that to be “penetration”, but it’s possible to perform oral sex on a woman without her labia entering your mouth. For women, being forced to receive oral would count if the man’s tongue entered the vagina.

Funny thing, that. Out of seven categories, for the exact same acts, men are labeled as victims in one or possibly two, and women are labeled as victims in four or possibly five. Same acts. Only one act (receiving forced anal) would be considered rape for both, and only two (being forced to perform manual or anal sex on someone) would be considered not to be rape for both. In every other category, the act performed on a woman would be considered rape, and the act performed on a man would notLet’s look at this situation.

They were both drunk, so while I may not agree with it we accept that both of them are unable to consent. Since we know they couldn’t have consented, we look up at the chart. ”Forced heterosexual intercourse”, what do we have? According to the definition, she was raped but he wasn’t. Wait, what?

  • They both got drunk.
  • He was more drunk than her.
  • She made sexual advances.
  • She got on top of him.
  • She fucked him.

But he’s the rapist and she’s the victim? What. The. Everloving. Fuck.

When Women do rape men or boys

When women rape men the women usually end up receiving child support even if the man makes the plea that he was raped by her. That just doesn’t matter, and in cases like LANCASTER, Ohio where a 21 year old woman is being sued for the custody of her duaghter by the 15 year old father’s parents. This 21 year old woman claims to love the 15 year old father of her child very much but already has a live in boyfriend acting as step father.

What feminists have to say about little boys

Beyond call infant boys rapists the ladies of Feministing, have the following to say about their sons.

My son is beautiful, smart, and extremely capable. Obviously, this terrifies me. I have spent a lot of time asking myself this very, very important question: How do I teach my son to not abuse his privilege?

To be sure, I recognize the privilege my son received by accident of birth. He was born to two white, middle-class parents. I have a college education, as does my current partner and my son’s father. He is an only child, and has four grandparents in his life that absolutely dote on him. There is a never-ending supply of love, learning, and involvement. My son has opportunities that many children are not blessed with.

Wow terrified and scared because your son is smart, and capable really what the hell does this mean she thinks he’s a rapist at whatever fucking age he is long before he even calls his penis anything other than pee-pee. I am not too sure how to adress the second thing these women have to say about a boy.

We recently purchased a house, and to make the transition easier for him, we allowed my son to pick whatever color he wanted to paint his room. He originally picked pink. (My son adores pink, and spent most of his toddlerhood wearing pink and purple pajamas.) I agonized over the choice. There was a part of me that was overjoyed…my son obviously is confident in what he likes, and doesn’t feel the need to conform to what the world tells him about being a BOY. However, I flashed forward to the time when he would invite his male friends over, and they would tease him endlessly about having a “girly” room. The thought of my child being the subject of ridicule is horrifying, as I’m sure any parent can attest to. (Plus, who wants to repaint when he changes his mind in 6 months?!) Ultimately, he chose orange walls and pink trim. I still think about this incident, though, and ponder what it means to try to balance feminist parenting with living in the “real world” where kids can and do get hurt for being different.

Really this kid is not going to have any friends after they see his room is pink! Also being made fun of is a part of life, we need to be mocked and harrased just enough in our youth that we strive to prove those who mocked us wrong. Be luaghed at for not having enough strenght to do a push up in 1st grade made me determeined to be healthy and fit, while the boy who mocked me is now a fat writer for a local paper who can’t even imagine why or how I would do 40 push ups a day after waking up. The next point she makes is,

My son is very sensitive. He cries easily, gets his feelings hurt often, and is generally more attuned to what is going on with people’s emotions around him. He has always been kind of my little empath, reacting to the world around him and showing every bit of what he’s feeling to anyone who may be paying attention. This causes MANY of the people around him, especially older men, to be very troubled by his shows of emotion. He has been told more times than I can count to “toughen up”, “act like a boy”, and “don’t act like such a baby, girl, (insert insulting feminine word here).” I get very frustrated trying to teach him that it is OK to be that way, no matter what the world is telling him he *should* act like. I am actually very surprised that more of the behavior hasn’t been conditioned out of him yet. I hope that reflects my never-ending support in him and how he choses to display himself. I dread the day when all the conditioning he has received about how to “act like a man” starts to take hold, and I see my beautiful son start trying to hide his emotions.

While I agree we shouldn’t hide our feelings or emotions and supress them till we crack. I do think that we need to realize crying about things will not make them better. When a recruit is told to climb a rope in boot camp and his hands hurt bad crying won’t get him up the rope. As for the empath thing really that isn’t completely accurate lady empaths can project their emotions onto others please learn to read before you write.

I am very careful to correct people (mostly people that I know, although I have done it to strangers) when they ask my son “Oh, do you have a girlfriend?” that I do not presume my son’s sexuality, and he may very well end up with a boyfriend, or not want to have a partner at all. This is usually met with eyerolls or stern looks.

Alright we get you want your son to be the embodiment of the stereotypical gay man! Raising a boy to be a girl or raising a boy to be a homosexual is child abuse you cannot force gender or sexual prefference on a child.

Blaming men for everything bad in life

This is my bigest fucking issue with the feminist movement, they can’t seem to accept their own failures as their own. Not only are tehy not to blame for their actions but when women murder anyone for any reason they will blame some guy for the crime. When Andrea Yates murdered all of her children, feminists said ‘it was the husband’s fault’ for leaving her alone at home 
with the children. Really so four innocent little boys were stripped of their lives because daddy had to work. say what you want about feminism but if women in general have this idea in their heads that they don’t have to raise their children what does it say about us as a people?

In all this blaming men for everything in life is analogous to Hitler and the Jews. Women are not in politics enough, the reason must be a man god forbid the reason be most women don’t want to endure the mud slinging that comes with running for office. Women aren’t majoring in math and science enough, blame a man god forbid it be the fact women seem to cling to the less difficult Women’s studies course in college. In all feminists really need to start being a little more thankful to men. We never held you back we just kept you safe even if we had to die a slow death in freezing waters so you could get off the boat.

The reality of life today is that men are even more oppressed by a social and legal system in which feminists have contributed too. Men are just as likely to be abused by a woman in a relationship as women. False Rape accusations are not at 2% and the fact women are getting away with felony fraud means real rape victims male and female will not receive the concern they should, and I can’t blame the police after all they did just waste a lot of money on the last liar who walked in the doors. Feminists need to wake up most of the issues they believe in are dead or are not caused by sexism. It is a movement failing to adapt much less expand its frame of mind.

Rape and Death Threats 
Feminist child abuse

I’m sure there’s a reason that Katie made this ridiculous statement… right? Maybe it’s because feminists have a tendency of labeling any form of dissenter as an MRA. It sure is an interesting but downright vile shaming tactic. The thought process works something like this;

Egalitarian = MRA
Anti-Feminist = MRA
Misogynist = MRA
Rapist = MRA
Any cis male who disagrees with a feminist = MRA

But the mental gymnastics don’t stop there. According to feminists, given the above;

MRA = Anti-Feminist
MRA = Misogynist
MRA = Rapist
MRA = Cis male

All in all it’s just a giant ad hominem attack derived from pure bias. The goal is to simply make MRAs look bad as opposed to actually refuting their arguments – something feminists have, time and time again, been unable to do.

The Jezebel article in question is defending a woman who;

Showed up to a men’s rights event with the intent of silencing it
Had her cronies pull the fire alarm in attempts to shut down the talks
Screamed “Shut the fuck up! Shut the fuck up!” at anyone who attempted to argue with her
Sang “cry me a river” when the high rate of male suicides was brought up
Generally behaved like a screeching harpy
The article goes on to continually make the same fallacious argument I just spoke of; Anyone who doxxed her or threatened her ( whether they were just random internet users or nutcases from 4chan) were referred to as MRAs – regardless of whether they were actually MRAs or not. And you know what? Given her atrocious behaviour, nicknames such as “Little Red Frothing Fornication Mouth” are pretty damn accurate.

What I find interesting is that you are somehow blissfully unaware of how feminists treat dissenters on Tumblr. Take a look in the “kill all men”, “feminism”, “misandry” and even the “MRA” or “men’s rights activist” tags and you’ll see what I’m talking about. Of course Jezebel is a site that condones rape and murder of men and boys. So even if the men who did this were MRAs then well it would only be a thing called “what goes around comes around”  

This is what she says about me 

xxxdude – For being blatantly sexist, objectifying women, all while claiming that feminism is to blame for all of his problems and whining for being called out on his BS. He actually blocked me first, after spamming my inbox with messages that went unanswered (a number of them amounted to “why don’t you like me?”) He then called me a coward. For what? Who knows. Then, when I created the DA group, Childfree Visibility, and made it an affiliate with another group, Childfree-Club, he ran off and created a page that was all about how women exist for the pleasure of men, and then got the admin of Childfree-Club to make it an affiliate.) The info page of the sexist group was lifted right off the info page of the group I had just created the day prior (with a few edits, obviously,) making it a blatant trolling attempt directed specifically at me. This person HATES women, and loves pretending to be the victim when none of them want him.

I do objectify women its called human sexual desire, the funny thing is I defended her from a breeder man so what does that say about her? Oddly I never said why don’t you like me, I said I don’t like you and you don’t like me this the apex of idiocy and/or her need to be the victim. This group isn’t about women being pleasure objects for men, its about men and women hearing the truth and about helping them both have random sex. Over all she has a tad narcissistic personality,and could use some help