Do Not Respect Them

Monday, July 28, 2008
By Angry Harry

by Angry Harry

In my last piece on MND I suggested that long-time MRAs would do better by focusing less on the outrages that men so often have to endure (family courts, misandry in advertising etc) and focusing more on stirring up fear in the public about the impending awfulness that is going to continue to materialise unless we do something about political correctness and feminism.

But I now want to go further than this, and try to urge all MRAs to spend less time in the future discussing all the bullets that keep coming the way of men, and to spend more time firing some bullets back.

I have already pointed out in many of my pieces that it is only by being forceful and aggressive that groups can challenge successfully the status quo that is being maintained by those with power – the whole of History bears witness to this – e.g. see my piece Where’s The Men’s Movement – but now I want to further justify this transparent call to more aggressive action by pointing out that both feminism and political correctness are, by and large, foisted on to us by people who do not deserve our respect. On the contrary, in my view, they are some of the most disreputable of people living in our midst, and MRAs should have no moral qualms at all about striking them very hard indeed.

I am not talking about the gullible followers in the ordinary population who have simply swallowed all the lies, nor about the feminist men who have bought into these poisonous ideologies and, as a result, sincerely believe that women have always been treated badly compared to men, nor, indeed, about all those empty-headed arrogant self-aggrandised young women who have been brought up to hate men and who seem to spend so much of their time these days parroting the arrant nonsense that their equally empty-headed feminist-indoctrinated teachers once implanted inside their heads.

I am talking about those people who are knowingly disseminating lies, and fuelling hatred toward men in the process, simply because they profit from doing so.

Amongst these culprits, I include for special mention those in many ‘respected’ groups; such as politicians, academics, government officials, lawyers, judges, senior police officers as well as many of those who work in the media and/or in the abuse industry.

To begin with, however, I need to establish that such ‘respected’ people are, indeed, willfully lying and purposely stirring up hatred towards men – for profit.

And, to this end, I am simply going to ask you to use your brains, rather than present you with a catalogue of evidence that you would then need to research in order to verify it.

In other words, with regard to any of the specific examples that will follow below – and I could give you many more – I am simply going to ask you to use your intelligence to ascertain whether or not what I am telling you is true. And the only ‘research’ that might be required on your part if you wish to verify my claims can be done very quickly using Google.

(I know that many of you reading this will already be well aware of the mountains of evidence supporting the contentions that follow, and many of you will also have looked at some of the official ‘research’ carried out by many of the ‘respected’ groups above. But many newcomers will not be so familiar with these issues, and I specifically want to avoid presenting them with, for example, facts and figures which, as far as they are concerned, might or might not be true. In other words, I am restricting myself below to giving evidence which – to my mind at least – is very easily verified and understood.)

QUESTION: Are ‘respected’ groups of people purposely lying and stirring up hatred towards men for profit?

Example A: Over the past two decades or so many ‘respected’ groups and persons have claimed that there is a Gender Pay Gap, and that women get paid less for the same work that men do.

Now, for present purposes, we can ignore completely the question of whether or not there is, indeed, such a gap.

But what we can say – surely with absolute certainty – is that any wage gap that does, in fact, exist, must at least be caused partially by the choices that women make, and at least caused partially by the statistical differences between the natural propensities, strengths and weaknesses of men and women.

Thus, for example, surely there can be no question in anybody’s mind that because far more women than men, statistically speaking, give up their careers in order to raise families, then this factor alone is going to have some significant bearing on the issue of the pay gap – which is a statistical gap.

So why is it that when these ‘respected’ groups have vociferously complained in the past about the alleged pay gap, they have rarely, if ever, mentioned the fact that the choices of women must have at least some bearing on the issue?

Why try to suppress this fact?

Surely, if these ‘respected’ groups wanted to see a serious and honest public discussion take place about the alleged pay gap, then they would not try to hide important factors that are, quite clearly, relevant to it?

Now, please remember that I am talking about the ‘respected’ groups of people mentioned above – not ordinary folk.

These people are not stupid.

Indeed, they will contain some of the most intelligent people in the land.

And so it just cannot be the case that these ‘respected’ groups have simply failed to realise that women’s choices must have at least some bearing on the issue.

As such, it absolutely must be the case that these ‘respected’ groups who persistently decline to reveal the full reasons for the alleged pay gap in their public rhetoric about it are purposely attempting to deceive the people.

In other words, they are lying to them.

Thus, …

FIRM CONCLUSION 1: They are lying.

Furthermore, of course, in the commercial world, the feminist-inspired myth that women are paid less than men for the same work is risible; because if this was true then the men would soon be booted out of their jobs and replaced by the cheaper women. Shareholders and management would hardly tolerate employing more expensive workers when cheaper ones were available. They would be committing commercial suicide if they failed to employ the ‘cheaper’ women while other businesses rushed to do so.

Thus, it simply cannot be the case that in the commercial world employers are paying men more to do the same jobs as women. (If they did, they would soon be obliterated by the competition, and the alleged pay gap could not last for very long.)

Now, here is a very simple question for you.

Why do people persistently lie – or persistently attempt to deceive others – over any given matter?

When and why do people do this?

Well, I’ll tell you.

They do so whenever they believe that they have something to gain by lying. In other words, they expect to profit from doing so.

Thus, we can already conclude that our ‘respected’ groups expect to profit by lying.

Otherwise, why would they do it?

Thus, …

FIRM CONCLUSION 2: They are profiting in some way from their lies.

And now, here is another very simple question to answer.

With specific regard to the pay gap issue, is it the case that the lies and the deceptions of our ‘respected’ groups have resulted in an increase in hatred towards men?

Well, the answer is surely, Yes – because, in a nutshell, these ‘respected’ groups have been persuading women over the years that the wage gap is due to men persistently discriminating against them.

And the result has been that women across the western world have for many years been inflamed with anger towards men for, allegedly, cheating them when it comes to their pay.

Indeed, and for example, I still remember a female MP (Jenny Tonge) telling viewers to a very popular programme in the UK that “women not only needed to get equal pay with men, they needed to ‘get even’ with men” – where ‘get even’ means ‘to take revenge’ – for men’s alleged wickedness in cheating women out of fair pay.

As was typical of the times when it came to this issue, the audience applauded and cheered the notion that women should ‘get even’ – which reflects how effective has been the campaign of hatred towards men associated with this particular issue.

Indeed, it was publicly accepted that women should ‘get even’ over many issues; e.g. over their alleged ‘oppression’ by men throughout history – a notion that is mostly untenable; e.g. see Were Women Oppressed in the West?

And this incitement to ‘get even’ remains strong even today.

Thus, …

FIRM CONCLUSION 3: The ‘respected’ groups are lying. They are stirring up hatred towards men. And they are profiting from doing so

With regard to the wage gap issue alone, they have been doing these things for two whole decades – with much success.

(For example, check out Google for any rhetoric prior to 2003 from the ‘respected’ groups associated with the pay gap. Or take a look at this from the BBC News website in 2001 – Men also still have higher wages despite equal pay legislation – the clear implication being that men are somehow colluding together to break the law by giving men higher pay. As another example – this time from the UK’s Equal Opportunities Commission – the EOC renews call for equal pay audits .)

Now, it is true to say that, thanks to the internet and to the MM, there is some light getting through to the public with regard to this issue, and the ‘respected’ groups that have been lying have recently had to grit their teeth and back off, bit by bit. In other words, they are finally having to accept that they can no longer get away fully with all their customary deceptions about the pay gap.

But for two whole decades, they did.

Now, before I move on to the next example, I want to stop my flow for the moment, and simply admit to you that – even with regard to the issue of the pay gap – I find myself truly outraged by the fact that ‘respected’ groups of people in our society are prepared to lie and to stir up hatred towards men simply in order to feather their own nests.

It is bad enough when, for example, people or companies exaggerate how wonderful are their services or their products – though, of course, there is usually some kind of law to prevent too much in the way of exaggeration or deceit in this area – but for ‘respected’ groups of people to try continually to ’sell’ their own products or services by almost unrestrainedly stirring up hatred toward their own men by using deception and deceit seems to me to be utterly deplorable.

Thus, in my view, this situation also tells us something rather important about the ‘respected’ people who are doing this.

First and foremost, it surely tells us that they do not deserve to be respected.

Indeed, I think that they deserve to be clobbered very hard.

And please remember that the people in these ‘respected’ groups are often highly intelligent – with many of them – such as successful politicians – being top-notch first-rate activists – political or otherwise – with years and years of experience, and who also have access to others with similar expertise from whom they can learn.

In other words, they know damn well what they are doing.

They know that any alleged pay gap has got at least something to do with women’s choices.

They know that they are lying and deceiving when they fail to address this highly relevant fact.

And they know that they can profit themselves by stirring up hatred towards men via this issue.

So. Who are these lofty people who want to stir up hatred towards their very own countrymen – in this particular case, by being deceitful over the reasons for the alleged pay gap? And why are they doing it?

Well, there are three things that I can claim with much confidence when it comes to answering these two questions.

Firstly, it has got precious little to do with these people wanting to get rid of the alleged pay gap.

This is all about them wanting to maintain jobs, empires, power and wealth – for themselves.

And you, as a man, are their patsy .

Secondly, unless men and women are forced to be identical in almost every way imaginable, these people will always be able to claim that there is a pay gap of some kind, and so, in practice, they will never stop lying and they will never stop stirring up hatred towards men – unless they are prevented from doing so.

(To gain some understanding of why ‘their’ pay gap will never disappear see my piece entitled Equality Between Men and Women Is Not Achievable . Once again, you will only need to use your brains rather than wade through any major research.)

Thirdly, these lofty and ‘respected’ people know this.

They know that they will never get rid of the pay gap.

How do I know that they know this?

Very simple.

I have been a strong (but part-time) activist for 8 years.

Many of these people have been at this game for over 35 years.

Many of them are very well-funded. Many work professionally and get paid to worry about such issues in their full-time jobs. And many are far more intelligent than me.

And if I can see that the gender pay gap issue can never be ’solved’, then so can they.

For example, as I mention in the piece alluded to above, if women were, in fact, to get paid more than men, then these people would almost certainly start demonising men on the grounds that women were now paying more in taxes than men.

Indeed, the following proposal is already being discussed in lofty circles …

… reduce income taxes on women and increase, by less, income taxes on men in a way that holds total tax revenue constant .

So, from where I am sitting, not only do I see “respected” people purposely lying about the pay gap and stirring up hatred towards men in the process, it seems to me that they will never stop doing this. (Also see A Permanent Gender War? )

EXAMPLE B: For some two decades now, certain groups who claim to be concerned with the welfare of children – such as the NSPCC in the UK – have been drowning out almost any public debate concerning sexual abuse with the hysterical notion that, “It will ruin their lives.”

Now, apart from the fact that this notion is highly debatable – in the sense that any effects on future lives are surely dependent upon what, exactly, happened – it is absolutely clear that persistently pummeling into children’s brains the idea that such abuse will ‘ruin their lives’ will, in fact, increase very much the likelihood that such a result will come about for those children who have, indeed, been abused; e.g. see my piece Children’s Charities Sued for Millions?

Thus, I doubt that there is any parent of an abused child reading this who would persist in telling their own child that their life is now ‘ruined’ – as a result of some past abuse.

Indeed, I would go much further.

I would say that any adult who tries to indoctrinate abused children with the view that their lives are now ‘ruined’ ought to be locked up – for sheer cruelty towards those children.

But such a sentiment is exactly what many of these groups have been propounding very loudly for the past many years.

In other words, these people have actually been prepared to inflict serious, long-term harm on to all those children who have been abused in order to achieve some aim.

But what aim, exactly? – because, quite clearly, they are certainly not very concerned about children who have been abused.

And the answer to this question is the same as for the previous example.

This is all about them wanting to maintain jobs, empires, power and wealth – for themselves.

And, once again, you, as a man, are their patsy – because, for the most part, you are the target of their hatred when it comes to ‘abuse’ – and, in this particular case, children who have been abused also have to bear the costs of their nefarious activities.

Now, some of you might think, “Well, they are only doing their best in order to highlight child sexual abuse.”

But, think again.

For example, you could surely argue with equal validity that, for example, it would be morally acceptable to keep telling children whose parents had divorced that ‘their lives will be ruined’ as a result of the divorce.

After all, they might be.

But just because an event such as divorce or abuse might lead to negative long-term effects for particular children, surely it is a thoroughly unconscionable act to persistently tell all children in such circumstances that their lives will be ruined ? – because one thing is for certain; whatever negative effects such events would have had, they will be magnified and compounded enormously by such rhetoric; e.g. see my piece Tea Abuse .

“Your life is ruined. Your life is ruined. Your life is ruined.”

Furthermore, of course, most readers of this website will be well aware that divorce does, indeed, have large negative effects on a great number of children. But would anyone here really consider it moral or ethical to implant into the minds of those children with single parents the belief that, inevitably, their lives will be ruined?

Would we, as MRAs, ever go round telling the children of single parents, “Your life is ruined”?

I don’t think so.

So. What kind of lowlife would, in fact, keep saying such things to those children who have, indeed, suffered from ‘abuse’?

Well, clearly, this lowlife is to be found in many of our ‘respected’ groups.

FIRM CONCLUSION 1: These people are lying – and, worse, they are actually hurting the very children whom they would claim to be so concerned about.

Now, as before, when people persistently lie or deceive, it is because they have something to gain by doing so.

In this case, these ‘respected’ groups are mostly hoping to gain attention, power and funding. After all, I think that we can assume that their primary goal is not, actually, to hurt children.

Thus, …

FIRM CONCLUSION 2: They are profiting in some way from their lies.

With specific regard to this issue, is it the case that the lies and deceptions of our ‘respected’ groups have resulted in an increase in hatred towards men?

Of course it has.

The child-abuse industry has been at the forefront of fuelling this hatred towards men. Indeed, this industry in now also targeting women quite heavily.

However, the point here is that the answer is, Yes.

Thus, …

FIRM CONCLUSION 3: They are lying. They are stirring up hatred towards men. And they are profiting from doing so

EXAMPLE C: A couple of years ago, a postman in the UK who stopped his delivery bicycle in the street and impulsively kissed a woman acquaintance on the cheek was charged with ’sexual assault and battery’ because she later objected to his behaviour.

The jury did not swallow it, and he was cleared – e.g. see my piece Kissing is Battery .

But the point here is this.

The government officials in the Crown Prosecution Service and the police clearly tried to have this man convicted of ’sexual assault and battery’ merely for planting an unwanted kiss on a woman’s cheek.

And, of course, had he been convicted, his lifetime police record would have said that he had committed ’sexual assault and battery’ – an appalling and gross misrepresentation of what this man had actually done.

In fact, a downright lie.

But this attempt to exaggerate wildly over matters concerning ‘abuse’ is par for the course. This has been happening for the past three decades in just about every area where ‘abuse’ is the issue.

Whether it is rape, domestic violence, sexual harassment, sexual assault etc etc, the ‘respected’ groups that are concerned with these issues have tried in just about every way possible to deceive the public over these matters – and this nonsense about a quick kiss being ’sexual assault and battery’ is just one example of their persistent attempts to demonise men, to extend their definitions of ‘abuse’ and to exaggerate wildly the nature of the ‘crime’ – in this case, a kiss on the cheek.

Even the notion of “statutory rape” is designed to give the impression to the public that every illicit penetrative act with an underage person is an act of force and violence – “rape” – taking place against the person’s will, when, in fact, this, relatively speaking, is rarely the case.

(Always remember that more extreme things tend to happen much less often than less extreme things. In other words, you can bet your last dollar that the number of statutory rapes involving force is much, much lower than the number of such ‘rapes’ that do not involve force. The term ‘rape’, however, is specifically chosen by the government to implant the former into the minds of the public even though it is the latter that is the more common, by far.)

Well, I do not think that anyone reading this needs to research the notion that whatever an unwanted kiss on the cheek might be, it is definitely not ’sexual assault and battery’.

Furthermore, a quick look at the legal definitions makes it clear that someone who is convicted of “statutory rape” has not necessarily engaged in the type of activity that most of the public normally understands by the term “rape”.

In both cases, the idea is clearly to try to make the unthinking public believe the worst about the perpetrators and, hence, about the nature and frequency of men’s misbehaviours.

Indeed, when it comes to rape, the public and the justice system seem nowadays to regard rape as being akin to murder – particularly the murder of men – judging by the sentences that are handed out and the rhetoric.

And yet the notion that rape and murder – particularly what is commonly regarded as ‘rape’ these days – are even remotely equivalent to each other is preposterous. They are a million miles apart.

But this insulting equivalence demonstrates just how successful has been the devaluation of men throughout the western world and how adept have been the ‘respected’ groups at exaggerating the effects of all types of ‘abuse’.

Here is just another recent example of a ‘respected’ group trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public …

The British Crime Survey’s summary in its chapter on intimate violence flags up the fact that ‘stalking’ was the most common form of intimate violence experienced in the past year. This may seem like a cause for alarm. Yet dig deeper into the report and it confirms that most stalking convictions were for letter-writing or telephone calls (67 per cent) …

This is an example of the government trying to inflate in the minds of the public the figures for the incidence of ‘Intimate Violence’; the idea clearly being to mislead the public into believing that both the frequency and the severity of violence committed by men are much worse than is actually the case.

Equally appalling, of course, is the fact that all allegations of rape are counted as real rapes in the crime statistics of most western governments, even though the evidence suggests that in these countries the majority of rape allegations are false.

In summary, when it comes to the issue of ‘abuse’, we can surely say this about many of our ‘respected’ groups.

FIRM CONCLUSION: They are lying. They are stirring up hatred towards men. And they are profiting from doing so

Furthermore, regardless how one actually feels about specific kinds of ‘abuse’, surely we should expect those in our ‘respected’ groups to tell us the truth about them, not to exaggerate wildly or to deceive us – particularly when this also results in a stirring up of hatred toward an entire group of their own people.

In addition, my own view is that no matter how awful is a crime or a criminal, we should always be told the truth by our ‘respected’ groups, and they should not attempt to portray those crimes or criminals as being far worse than, in fact, they are.

It is bad enough when, let’s say, the tabloids do such things, but it should be totally unacceptable for the government and the legal system to do this.

I should also add that these ‘respected’ groups that are concerned with ‘abuse’ will also never be ’satisfied’ – because they will always seek to extend the definitions of ‘abuse’ so that they cover more and more typical forms of normal non-abusive behaviour.

Remember: Some of these respected groups sought to have an unwanted kiss classified as ’sexual assault and battery’. Writing unwanted letters is currently being categorised as intimate ‘violence’.

(And there are numerous other examples that I could give to demonstrate that these ‘respected’ groups will never stop attempting to demonise men.)

EXAMPLE D: My final example comes from the world of medicine, and it is probably best understood by looking at this short piece entitled Self-Harm . You will see that the ‘respected’ groups who work on health matters sneakily reverse their view with regard to the different levels of self-harm that men and women supposedly inflict upon themselves – as usual, in order to portray women, rather than men, as the major victims – whatever the true circumstances might be. And they do this by pushing out of the picture those self-harming activities wherein men self-harm more so than women.

But when it comes to explaining why men are outlived by women, the fact that men self-harm more so than women is suddenly ‘recognised’ – but it is used as a basis for blaming men for their lesser longevity.

Furthermore, if you read the piece, you will see that it is also being argued (indeed, with increasing frequency) that the poorer health of men should be one of the reasons why they should gradually be obliterated from the human population and, further, that men should be outlived by women.

In summary, the message from these ‘respected’ groups concerned with health matters is that women are the victims (despite the fact that they live longer and healthier lives) whereas men are becoming increasingly superfluous to the human race, and can soon be dispensed with. (Also see Steve Jones – A Parasite? )

Once again, therefore, we can say this about some of our ‘respected’ groups of people – in this case, working in the world of medical academia, …

FIRM CONCLUSION: They are lying. They are stirring up hatred towards men. And they are profiting from doing so.

And most of the profiting in this instance is to do with empire building and funding.

Basically, western governments and funding organisations will not provide much in the way of support to academics whose work tends to undermine the ideologies of feminism and political correctness. And so, for example, this usually means that women must always be portrayed as being victims, men must be blamed for this state of affairs, and when men are, in fact, victims, then this must be hidden from view as much as possible.

For example, when it comes to men and boys committing suicide, …

Even in academia, where you can find studies on the most obscure topics, there is little research explaining why boys are disproportionately killing themselves. The Center for Adolescence at Stanford, a nationally recognized clearinghouse on teen behavior, has no one on its long roster of experts who can speak on the topic. Neither does the American Association of Suicidology, an organization dedicated to suicide prevention since 1968.

“As much as I would love to lead the charge (in finding out why boys kill themselves), try to go out and get funding for it,” said Lanny Berman, the executive director of the association. He is frustrated that funders aren’t interested in studying boys and men.

“If there is no research money available, no academician is going to go that route,” he said. “As executive director, I have to pay attention to fundable projects.”

So the association has an expert on female suicide but none on male suicide, even though suicide is an overwhelmingly male issue well beyond adolescence .

Joan Ryan

Link

(My underlining.)

Furthermore, those academics who have the bravery to oppose the current-day ideology wherein women must be portrayed as being deserving – while men must be portrayed as being relatively worthless and should be treated as such – are quite likely to find themselves in serious professional trouble as well as having to bear significant hostility from various well-organised victim groups – many of which are, in fact, covers for political activist groups; e.g. see Feminists Are Nasty Things.

Finally, I cannot resist pointing out that when it comes to ‘respected’ groups lying, stirring up hatred towards men, and profiting in the process, there is, of course, another group – consisting of quite a few million women – that is, women who take advantage of the current climate of misandry that prevails; e.g. by making false allegations and/or by exaggerating hugely the extent of their suffering following any alleged incident.

SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS:

Throughout this piece I have tried to give some examples that demonstrate that many ‘respected’ groups of people are lying to the public about many serious issues and, further, that they are stirring up hatred towards men with the specific intention of serving themselves in some way.

Furthermore, I do not think that these examples require much in the way of ‘academic research’ to establish their validity.

But the main point of this piece is to highlight the fact that these ‘respected’ groups should not be respected by MRAs.

Furthermore, there is very little point in MRAs discussing various statistics or research findings when it comes to combating these groups because, in fact, most of the social science research on gender issues these days is phony and/or it is decidedly unconvincing (e.g. see my piece Rape Baloney – Part Three ).

Besides which, as I pointed out above, the main aim of these respected groups is to serve themselves, not to solve the issues that they claim they are concerned with and, further, that many lofty people in these ‘respected’ groups are well aware that these issues can never be ‘resolved’ in practice – e.g. also see Signing the Sex Consent Document for a further insight into this.

In other words, these people will continue to demonise men no matter what the situation – and no matter what the ‘research’ findings – unless, that is, MRAs spend less time discussing their bullets, and far more time firing back at them.

Now, I have no doubts at all that these ‘respected’ people are going to be exposed eventually for the dishonest, malicious, greedy people that they must be, but the longer that this takes the longer will your life as a man continue to be seriously undermined and poisoned by them.

As such, MRAs should have no qualms at all about destroying their empires, nor about stirring up as much hatred towards them as they have been doing toward you for the past three decades. In other words, fight fire with fire.

After all, how long are you prepared to tolerate men being charged with ’sexual assault and battery’ simply for giving an inappropriate kiss?

How long are you prepared to live in a world wherein any woman – no matter how wicked – can damage your life horrendously simply by making a false accusation?

How long are you prepared to see your children and the nation’s children brought up to fear you and to hate you? – e.g. see NSPCC Needs To Be Stopped .

How long are you prepared to be portrayed as worthless and to be treated as such? – not only by the law, but even by ’scientists’.

On my own website, I often talk about these ‘respected’ groups as being parts of ‘organisms’ – huge amorphous entities which really do seem to have lives of their own.

Well, my view is that MRAs should seek to kill these things, rather than to talk about them or to discuss in great detail whatever they happen to be saying or doing at any given time.

In other words, MRAs need to engage more directly and more aggressively in this war.

And they are not going to win this war any time soon if they simply spend their time discussing the various natures of the bullets – bullets that, as we have seen, will never stop coming unless these malevolent organisms are destroyed.

And this means, firstly, that MRAs more often need to expose to the public just how dishonest, malicious and self-serving are so many of those in our ‘respected’ groups and, secondly, that MRAs should feel no obligation to be respectful towards them.

After all, as we have seen; if they are given the chance, these people will continue to demonise you and to harm you. They will continue to lie and to deceive in order to do this. And they will continue to do all these things simply in order to profit themselves .

And, most chillingly, they will continue to do these things forever into the future because their ‘issues’ will never be solved to their ’satisfaction’. (For example, they can always keep ‘changing the goalposts’ when it comes to matters of ‘abuse’.)

And something that I really must get across to you is the fact that many of the ‘respected’ people in our ‘respected’ groups know this.

Of course they do.

Many are highly intelligent. Many are very experienced activists of some sort. And many will also know from their history books that demonising and stirring up hatred toward some targeted group – in this case, ‘men’ – is a very effective way of maintaining empires, funding, wealth and power.

Indeed, this tactic has been repeated time and time again very successfully throughout the whole of history.

Thus, …

Firm Conclusion: These are really nasty people.

And if the public becomes much more aware of just how malicious and self-serving are these ‘respected’ groups, then MRAs will not need to waste so much of their time discussing this piece of ‘research’ from 1970, or that piece of ‘research’ from 1990, because once these ‘respected’ groups are exposed for who they really are, their credibility on all matters will plummet like a stone and the public will much more readily see what they are getting up to.

Finally, for any women reading this, Watch Out, because these ‘respected’ groups are increasingly coming after you – e.g. see A senior nurse at a leading public school has been sacked after smacking her 10-year-old son at home .

Of course they will be coming after you.

They want the ‘business’.

- AH

Angry Harry is a social critic based in the UK. Visit his website at http://angryharry.com

| More from Angry Harry

Stumble It!

Share/Save/Bookmark

How to survive the coming food shortage.

41 Responses to “Do Not Respect Them”

  1. 1
    Angry Harry Says:

    And just today! …

    “Rape victims who retaliate against a taunting attacker will be able to legitimately claim they had been provoked, according to the new rules.”

    http://tinyurl.com/6gem97

    Yep: **You** become more worthless by the day.

    It seems that a woman can now escape a charge of murder for killing a man simply by claiming that he was raping her – or molesting the baby.

    (Of course, the man will not be alive to say that he did not do such a thing. So, basically, the woman can just lie without too much fear of being caught, in most cases.)

    However, given that most people, I am sure, would much rather be raped than lose their children, then it must also be the case that politicians, judges, government officials, and even wives, who prevent a man from being with his children are ‘provoking’ such a man even more so that is a woman being ‘provoked’ when it comes to her being raped.

    As such, it must be even more legitimate for a man to kill politicians, judges, government officials, and even wives who prevent him from being with his children.

    Interesting, eh?

  2. 2
    poiuyt Says:

    This is a fantastic piece that MRAs would do well to read and re-read for their own personal use and mental fortification.

    The leadership of our nations are indeed stirring up contempt and hatred for male citizens at an incresing and alarming rate. So extensively is this the case that nowadays new anti-male laws are made as a necessity on account of the consequences and reactions to previous anti-male laws already existing. A vicious circle.

    Further examples, below will show more of the curiosities and paradoxii of male predicament in misandric nations. However it must be said at the onset that just as many males are themselves serving the machinery and structures of the anti-male society for money:

    1- In sweden it is now held that a female prostitutes’ male clients only are the ones commiting an offence. The misandric law doesnt account for a similar criminalising of female clients of male prostitutes.

    2- In most of europe and north america it is respected in law that a mother is the best person to raise her daughter to adulthood and maturity. But the law does not show any such respect in the case of boys whom are to be deprived of their fathers for profit in a way girls aren’t deprived of their mothers.

    3- All over the world males are being circumcised at a rate and extent that exponentially outstrips circumcision of females. Yet we only hear of the barbarity and pain of this practice where it concerns women, without any such concern for the men routinely undergoing this odium.

    4- Another matter that fails to be aluded to in domestic violence hoopla is this. The income and property of males, that domestic violence law targetts, to give free to females is not earned on account of a mans sex or his alleged violence. Nor does a man have income and property for the fact of his alleged battery. No. A man has that income and property the law wishes to snatch, purely as a result of his work. So victim or not, a woman wanting such property only has to go to work and get it for herself.

  3. 3
    anti armchair generals Says:

    Annry Harry,
    In one political workshop a rhetorical question was asked
    “If a tree falls in the forest and it’s not in the
    Evening News. did it happen”?
    We as men are in the same predicament. Our version will not be told by the MSM. As you pointed out, they are as corrupt as others you listed.

    “Amongst these culprits, I include for special mention those in many ‘respected’ groups; such as politicians, academics, government officials, lawyers, judges, senior police officers as well as many of those who work in the media and/or in the abuse industry.”

  4. 4
    orwell46 Says:

    RESPECT:

    We need to lead those around us–which means this: we need to focus ourselves on what needs to be done, and we need to tell those around us who are not identified with the movement, “Follow us.”

    Our enemies have relied on our silence, and our unwillingness to state our opinions. They have all too many of us cowed. Harry you have it right–the verb to focus on is “respect.”

    Harry, and all of you, here’s a slogan for the next six months. “We don’t respect this.” Here’s how to use it.

    “This is lying. We don’t respect this.”

    “This is nest-feathering. We don’t respect this.”

    “This is deception. We don’t respect this.”

    “This is self-delusion and grandiosity. We don’t respect this.”

    (John M. )

  5. 5
    orwell46 Says:

    Further. It is our silence that allows the self-delusion of our enemies to flourish. We need to stand up and shed some light on them–together. “We don’t respect this” contains a world in its subtext:

    Here it is, for you English majors and writers, the implied subtext in “We don’t respect….”

    “There is a WE in the world. WE, this group, are observing you. WE, this group, have the backbone to speak for ourselves. WE, this group, is telling you you are deluded. WE, this group, can see you better than you can see yourselves. WE, this group, are telling you you are confused and your minds are darkened. WE, this group, are telling you we don’t respect this baloney you are putting out. WE, this group, are telling you are laughable. We don’t respect your silly words and destructive behavior. It’s not worthy of respect. WE have consulted among each other and decided this.”

    (John M, Lowell)

  6. 6
    Virtue Says:

    http://www.answers.com/respect&r=67

    re·spect (rÄ­-spÄ•kt’) pronunciation
    tr.v., -spect·ed, -spect·ing, -spects.

    1. To feel or show deferential regard for; esteem.
    2. To avoid violation of or interference with: respect the speed limit.
    3. To relate or refer to; concern.

    n.

    1. A feeling of appreciative, often deferential regard; esteem. See synonyms at regard.
    2. The state of being regarded with honor or esteem.
    3. Willingness to show consideration or appreciation.
    4. respects Polite expressions of consideration or deference: pay one’s respects.
    5. A particular aspect, feature, or detail: In many respects this is an important decision.
    6. Usage Problem. Relation; reference. See Usage Note at regard.

    Do not respect them…..ABSOLUTELY

  7. 7
    dads & things » Blog Archive » Harriet Harman criminally hates men Says:

    [...] But I now want to go further than this, and try to urge all MRAs to spend less time in the future discussing all the bullets that keep coming the way of men, and to spend more time firing some bullets back….(Full Story) [...]

  8. 8
    FathersHaveNaturalRights Says:

    Men’s rights groups have primarily focused on what they are against: male-bashing, feminist lies, etc.

    That’s fine and should continue.

    But the majority of the focus (and articles and letters) needs to be on what men are for, and what rights of men laws and society need to respect: the right to be the primary caregivers of their children whether married, divorced, or never married; the right of primary custody; the right to keep the money they earned and the property bought with the money they earned instead of being forced to give some percentage of all that to their shiftless lazy Oprah watching ex; the right to work in occupations currently dominated by women, and the right to a presumption of innocence and good character in the absence of proof to the contrary.

    Men’s rights advocates, by any other name, need to focus on what they DO want, instead of focusing on just objections to all the garbage. That is part of it, but the affirmative case for how things SHOULD be (and how to realize that) needs to be the MAIN part.

    Also, it is stupid to focus on getting out of responsibilities as often happens on Men’s Rights pages. Usually the lines go, “Well, we have no legal rights should we should have no legal responsibilities either!”

    This is bull.

    Men are disenfranchised by current feminist law and cultural practices, SO THEREFORE men need to step up and reclaim their rights. That is the right way to make rights and responsibilities commensurate again.

  9. 9
    Misandry - The Final Fantasy Forums Says:

    [...] it, (it’s rather long). Once you have read it, look below to find out what this thread is about. Do Not Respect Them | MND: News and Commentary Since 2001 As few of you may know (or not know since this is not a widely known subject–or popular for that [...]

  10. 10
    amfortas Says:

    Harry calls for us to not respect. How does an ordinary chap show his complete lack of respect for these scum? Does nature show us the way?

    Tony Ashby climbed onto Harriet Harman’s (British Deputy PM) house, saying in effect to the world ‘Here lives an Evil one, a Man-Hating Orcette in the service of the Princess of Lies’. After a while, nature called and he pissed on her roof. The Policemen below, cheered.

  11. 11
    amfortas Says:

    Elsewhere a chap was reported to be incensed by women invading the men’s toilets at a large gathering. They squatted over the urinals while men were trying to relive themselves. He took the matter to Court.

    HE was fined $2000 for a ‘frivolous’ complaint.

    Next time, cut out the Courts and just piss on the women’s shoes. Or if you have to pursue it in Court, piss on the Judges shoes.

    Now THAT is showing ‘not respect’.

  12. 12
    anti armchair generals Says:

    mfortas (11)

    State of Maryland several years passed sc “potty parity”
    law. Public places had to have equal amount of toilets for women, even if they did not attend in same proportions as men, such as sports events.
    Some service facilities cut many men’s sections and converted them for women. They also argued that since men can use urinals they don’t need as many seats as women. Even some contraption was considereded as a female urinal, but it fizzled out.

  13. 13
    mruffolo Says:

    The only rights a citizen has is the rights their government gives them.

    There are more rules in America and more enforcement employees and more prisons and more money spent than any other country in the world.

    Crime is big business for America’s government. Crime keeps government employees busy – the police, judges, clerks, psychologists, media, lawyers, politicians, and parole officers, among others.

  14. 14
    martin.hale Says:

    @mruffolo

    “The only rights a citizen has is the rights their government gives them.”

    This is a widely misunderstood aspect of life in America our country didn’t start out with citizens “begging” for rights from the government. Instead, our founding documents, The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and The Bill of Rights, all collectively outline what the founders believed to be the rights of mankind as given by the Creator, and how government existed with the consent and approval of those citizens.

    Paragraph Two of the Declaration is still one of the most stirring and powerful examples of this philosophy in existence today:

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

    To keep with the theme of respect that AH has put forth, and to echo what FathersHaveNaturalRights said as well, it is clear that each of us must let the feminocracy know that we don’t respect their attempts to deprive us of our Creator-endowed rights, and that we have a positive manifesto of what we support in the form of our Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights. But we can’t be passive observers much longer. With each successive generation of boys, the female oligarchy grows stronger and more insidious. We have to carry the fight to them rather than just reacting to their onslaught.

    Much as our founding fathers did, we have an obligation to “to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their (our) future security.”

  15. 15
    Roger Knight Says:

    Firing back? Been doing that. Check out the Justice Files pages on my website. I list the names of the people in Washington State bureaucracy who participate in the tyranny. I also list such information as bankruptcies, civil, and criminal cases they have been involved in. Along with whether they are registered to vote and when they voted. Along with links to resources where the Internet surfer can look up the information themselves. I agreed only to keep house number and street addresses of homes and Social Security numbers off the website. But of course, the Internet surfer can use the Sound Politics Voter Database and each county’s public records and court records info to find much of this type of info, after getting started with my little website.
    Don’t like it? Then don’t work for the government doing a job that violates the constitutional rights of your fellow citizens. Because each one can do what I do.

  16. 16
    anti armchair generals Says:

    Roger Knight, 15
    I visited your website and it seems to focus mainly to the argument that the Anti-Peonage Act bans forced collection of child support. Did I understand it right or would you briefly explain the lengthy litigation.
    You also cite the need for state to file a cross appeal. Thew US Supreme Court agreed to decide the case in Zapata v. W R. Grace Co. But the parties agreed to settle the case before the high court could hear it. So the issue became moot.
    See, Mercer v Duke University, No.01-1512 USCA 4 (unpub)

    1 We note that the Supreme Court has recently granted certiorari to

    consider whether the time for filing a cross-appeal set forth in Rule

    4(a)(5) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure is mandatory and

    jurisdictional. See Zapata Indus. v. W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn., 70

    U.S.L.W. 3758 (U.S. Oct. 1, 2002) (No. 01-1766).

    4

  17. 17
    Denis Says:

    Harry-

    I’m quite certain I have ready every single one of your brilliant insights-this one is a classic that would be and excellent introduction and foundation for all MRAs-newcomers and oldtimers alike-prior to additional studies at http://www.angryharry.com.

    First off-thank you for taking the time to compose this.

    Anyone who reads this would be wise to read more from Harry.

    The world is indeed changing-all that really needs to happen is to increase the pace of change.

    It is only a matter of time-and also a matter of how quickly MRAs want to change the world for the better for the remainder of their lives.

    Many of the insights from Harry-and others here at MND-need to be spread around the internet on many many other publications-but especially to those in power:

    The President
    Members of Congress (esp. Sen. Biden)
    Governors
    State Legislatures
    Network News
    Cable News
    Talk Radio
    Newspapers

    THIS is how we show that we do not respect them.

    Have you received mail from the DNC or the RNC asking for donations to their candidate and cause?

    Imagine the impact on these organizations if they received thousands-or hundreds of thousands-of returned replies that state: “Not without equal representation for MEN”.

    All we need is an organized way to coordinate simple and easy ways to get our messages out to many different organizations.

    The ideas to spread all around are available to everyone-e.g., MND and http://www.angryharry.com-they just need to hit as many targets as possible-everyday.

    The more the better.

    The sooner the better.

    Thanks again Harry.

  18. 18
    julie Says:

    You need to start balancing.

    That is the nicest thing I can say to you.

    Anything I say just for the fact I am woman is useless to you and your ways and the men you are a sheep to. And any hard word I say will only be welcomed with; “Poor me, I am male” or “How this woman shames me”.

    You have cornered me as have the feminists.

    I am grateful for the information and that you allowed me to distribute at universities but I am very cautious to your goals as I am to theirs.

    I don’t like you. You are false and I have that right just as a human being.

  19. 19
    amfortas Says:

    Julie, put your skirt down and be nice.

  20. 20
    Zorik Says:

    Harry, you are so right about not trusting “scientists”. We need to learn to use common sense as much as possible and rely less on “experts”. I was fired for exposing the lies of my boss, a physics professor, who was omitting damaging scientific information from his reports. He did it because he was afraid that admitting the poor quality of his research would result in the loss of his grant money. So I’ve seen first hand how they lie to get funding. Even worse, NOBODY has stood up for me or against him. I have written to about a dozen people who are supposed to rectify such problems and all I’ve gotten are rebukes, threats, bribes, and often just ingored. This leads me to believe that the system as a whole is full of evil cowards. Even the agency that was being defrauded didn’t care. They need projects to spend taxpayers money on to justify their own existance.

  21. 21
    Zorik Says:

    Don’t forget that PHD often means Piled Higher and Deeper. The more “expert” they are, the easier it is for them to deceive us. Henceforth, regard the letters PHD as a red flag warning of danger, not as a sign of respect.

  22. 22
    South Says:

    Julie,

    If you have something useful to say then say it. If you want to disagree, OK. Otherwise, save your “I hate you crap” for girl’s night out.

  23. 23
    DrDamage Says:

    Julie, your rights and your disdain are meaningless. If you have logic or reason you should use that instead of whining that we don’t respect you. Demonstrate that you deserve our respect and it will be forthcoming.

  24. 24
    Teri Stoddard Says:

    Julie,

    These guys don’t dislike women. I’m a woman and they like me. I must admit, I probably frustrated the hell out of them for the three years it took for me to believe them. I know Harry and I had it out. Now I respect him greatly.

    I had to see this stuff with my own eyes, and I did. Feminists and DV “pros” lied under oath to my legislators. They also had a letter-writing campaign. Thousands of feminists across the country lied to my legislators, and we didn’t get our shared parenting bill passed.

    This has to stop. The truth must win, for our kids, for our grandkids. Half of them are male.

    teri

  25. 25
    Roger F. Gay Says:

    I’ve pointed out that people are lying … named names etc. in many of my articles. The real PC at the heart of the anti-father movement Political Corruption.

  26. 26
    amfortas Says:

    Teri, you are just the sort of strong, clear minded person, with that ‘balance’, that wild women like Julie need. A wild-Mare whisperer !

  27. 27
    julie Says:

    Teri, Amfortas and AH,

    You are all wise adults and you know there is more to this than men cutting down trees and slashing their swords through the forest.

    In reality (in the real world) the MRM wonders if men can even have a movement because of the characteristics of being a male.

    They are not feminising them to make them weak but feminising them to adjust to the way of the new age. They are saying, “Let go of your warrior ways, the clearing exists, it is time to build the world for the best of humankind”.

    “Do not respect them,” suggest AH. But who is he referring to? It is not just feminists. It is anyone educated enough to lead change.

    Yes, change is also shared parenting. Yes, change is also men’s refuges. Yes, change is also antimisandry.

    But change is also bringing down the big corporations and the corrupt leaders who are just loving this. And building, building, building.

    Take a step back is what I ask for. Look to how hate or even defiance of working together will destroy all our children. Look to how easy the churches will fall because they didn’t build but fought.

    It is about writing a new page. The world needs the MRM and yet the MRM only cares to destroy. “How can we follow them to build for the city needs to rebuild”.

    Rome has fallen. Our world will not become desolate and it won’t get there because there is too many knowledgeable and too much knowledge to stop it from doing so. We can’t hope for destruction just to satisfy pride.

    Sometimes heart is better than hate.

  28. 28
    Teri Stoddard Says:

    Julie,

    I think Harry was pretty clear who not to respect. In my book it’s everyone who profits off the pain and suffering of fathers (and mothers) and their children. I stopped respecting them as soon as I saw the hate and lies THEY promote.

    I do not think feminizing men is a good idea. It’s going against God, for one thing. It’s as bad as saying being gay isn’t biological. Being masculine is biological too.

    If the truth were told, instead of all the myths about men and violence, no one would even think we needed to feminize men. THEY promote those lies.

    Let me tell ya, if or when we have civil unrest, I want strong, tough, brave, even angry men around to help protect me. Luckily my son is one of those guys.

    Why is the government systematically removing rights from men? Why this push for VAWA and I-VAWA? I think I’ve figured it out.

    After watching David Icke’s video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4799447112501062338&q=4799447112501062338&ei=aqJzSKXlE5SK2wLd6JGoAQ and this one http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871&ei=KmyaSIuDKKfyqwOH\
    r4Uj&q=9%2F11+mysteries&hl=en
    about 9/11, I get it. They’re only starting with men. We’ll be next.

    thanks for sticking in with us,

    teri

  29. 29
    Zorik Says:

    Someone said: “…MRM wonders if men can even have a movement because of the characteristics of being a male.”

    Nonsense. Of couse we can have a movement. We have one already. Men have started zillions of movements and this will not be our last, just one of our best and most noble ever. Don’t belive rubbish to the contrary.

  30. 30
    Zorik Says:

    The MRM is impossible, yet here we are doing it. Only men can do the impossible.

  31. 31
    julie Says:

    Zorik,

    Maybe men have started zillions of movements. Yet, I don’t actually know what they were. Are we talking about wars?

    But this is not a normal war.

  32. 32
    FathersHaveNaturalRights Says:

    Feminism is fueled by women being the primary caregivers of the next generation. That makes the country a matriarchy.

    Changing that status is the core of the REAL fight against feminist megalomania.

    Men cannot say, “Well, we concede custody, care, raising, education, and direction of the human race’s children to women…but gosh darn it we still want to be treated as valuable”:

    DOES NOT WORK.

  33. 33
    Zorik Says:

    Dear Julie (#31).

    You have a negative view of men if you think all we do is start wars. First of all, we do lots of other things. Most scientists and inventors were men. Most captains of industry were and are men. Etc, etc.

    And speaking of wars, what about all the heros who died to save us from tyrants? 99% or more were men. Even when it comes to wars, there are the heros and the villians, but you see men only as villians.

  34. 34
    Zorik Says:

    Dear Julie (#31).

    And what about those hate-filled women we have read about in Palestine who are very proud of raising their sons up to be suicide bombers? Do you think women are innocent of bloodshed? Please think again.

  35. 35
    julie Says:

    Please don’t get me wrong Zorik. You show me how! I will step back and watch.

    Until men and women decide they can’t be in charge alone, the ones in the middle are paralysed to do anything anyhow.

  36. 36
    julie Says:

    That may sound kinda arrogant Zorik, but many eyes are on this war. Many have watched for decades. Many have been abused in the crossfire.

    I think you have to just let it sort itself out. That is what most are and have been doing so far.

    And personally,. I don’t care who wins as long as the good parents have some control of their children’s well being. Even just a chance to fight for their rights emotionally.

  37. 37
    amfortas Says:

    Not caring who wins is serious problem. You talk of war, Julie, as though it were an irritant and any winner will do as long as your home-fire keeps burning and a pot is on the stove.

    The battle is on for Humanity’s soul. The issue is Truth and Justice, Decency and Morality. The enemy is the Princess of LIES, a terrible and often subtle bitch whose intent is destruction. We MUST care who wins.

    It won’t just ’sort itself out’. That is fatalism and an abandonment of the very ‘independance’ that women think they seek. How ‘empowering’ is is to sit back and wait while things ’sort themselves out’?

    Quite how we go about defeating this curse on the soul is problematic but it isn’t helped by wishy-washy indecision and willful blindness about the nature of the fight or lack of care about its outcome. Nor by carping criticism of means that have not worked very well to date, acted upon by people who have been trying hard and come back from the battle-front bloodied and exhausted. A shade more thoughtful analysis is in order and a lot more resolve.

    But before even that, you must decide just whose side you fight on. The Good or the Bad. It is a simple Black and White issue, Julie, especially as in the fog of war a multitude of colours are difficult to discern. Having a highly developed ability for colour discrimination is fine for an interior decorator, but we need women – like you – to put the fabric swatches down, pick up a gun and point it in the right direction – like Teri does.

    Harry is defining means and pressing resolution buttons. Support him. Follow his lead. And if you are still confused, follow Teri or another who can see through the fog and smoke and knows what to do.

    Or get out of the way.

  38. 38
    julie Says:

    Nice come back with the “just get out of the way”.

    That is something I … never mind.

    ………..

    So, what are the sides again? I keep losing track as to whether this is not just a leftist fight amongst it’s own followers.

    FRA … sure I am 100% behind that.

    Mothers and fathers rights …. sure I am 100% over that too.

    Both those things I can work with. The rest I can’t find any sense for it just seems like a power war. How can I take sides over a gender power war? That is just silly IMO.

  39. 39
    julie Says:

    BTW Amfortas, I do see where AH is coming from. And I understand why he says what he says. And I have no problem with it.

    I take back having a problem with it if that is acceptable.

  40. 40
    Bernard Chapin Says:

    Angry Harry, perhaps the greatest MRA of them all. A hero of mine to whom I own much. Great piece brother!

  41. 41
    Zorik Says:

    Julie, one more thing about men starting wars. Most men do not start wars — only a tiny percentage do. I am really tired of having ‘male characteristics’ held against me becuase of thugs like Hitler and his minions.

    It’s the same problem we face from women who imply men are all jerks because *some* men commit rape.

    I could just as well say that all women are sluts because *some* women are prostitutes. I could call that a ‘characteristic of being female’. How would you like that?

    Wars are not characteristic of being male. They are characteristic of being Nazi, Commie, deceived, narrow-minded, hostile, etc.

Leave a Reply

International Mens Day and Fathers Day in Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden

Search MND

Introducing MRm: A New Men's Rights Magazine in PDF format

Download PDF Here

Support Our Sponsors!

Please support MND

Subscribe today:

SUSTAINER: $5/mo.


CONTRIBUTOR: $20/mo.


SUPPORTER: $50/mo.


Or Donate Any Amount

Archives

privacy policy | terms of service


Site Meter

MND: Your Daily Dose of Counter-Theory is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache!