In the 15 years since HIllary Clinton came to power in the USA (and never lost it), radical feminist organizations have proliferated in the USA with the help of unconstitutional federal funding and an American media controlled by only 5 politically correct corporations.
There are no seriously funded men’s rights organizations (MRO’s) as of late 2008.
Why the discrepancy? Here are some reasons:
1) Men have a natural chivalrous nature that has been exploited by clueless demagogues like Republican Senator Sam Brownback to blind the majority of American males to the fact that they are being slowly boiled alive by increasing feminist regulation of men via legislation and court rulings. The pace of increased regulation has been so slow that it is going unnoticed by most males, who are not being informed by the media in any case.
2) The leadership of the Republican Party decided, with the rise of the Neoconservative (Neocon) after 9-11-01, that the kind of American feminist who wanted to see dead Muslim male chauvinists was precisely the kind of pro-troops person to pander to. Neocons never once thought that this kind of “Red State Feminist” might also want to see tons of dead or jailed American “male chauvinists” among whom would ultimately include all American alpha males. In this past election, many of the troops fighting overseas were very aware that a Republican Party pandering to “Security Moms” was not really on their side despite all the rhetoric to the contrary. Everyone knows the Department of Homeland Security cares more about finding and punishing “deadbeat dads” and “potential future wife abusers” than they do about finding and punishing terrorists.
3) The type of male who would be a low paid journalist by trade (including most, but not all, full-time bloggers) is usually NOT going to be an alpha male, but rather a beta or gamma male who ultimately resents alpha males (this includes the war bloggers who think our troops are fairy princess angels who don’t read porn). One can assume correctly that the journalists who would fight for men’s rights would be females (Chris Matthews might be an exception in that he showed himself to be an alpha male when he correctly referred to male Hillary supporters as “Eunuchs singing in the Castrati Choir”).
In addition, the leadership of the 5 corporations that run the American media apparently assume that, since American women supposedly control household budgets and make the buying decisions for buying most products and services, no form of feminism should be criticized. This leadership, including Rupert Murdoch, have simply forgotten (or do not wish to acknowledge) that most American women are not feminists and/or don’t need to be pigeon holed as adhering to gender identity politics.
4) The slowly growing anglo-saxon Men’s Rights Movement (MRM) has, up to the present moment, mostly been a disorganized bunch of mostly divorced socially conservative males. These men, until recently, tended to concentrate mainly on what is called the Fathers’ Rights Movement (FRM) rather than on issues that more men would be interested in if those issues were publicized, such as the need to fight the bipartisan political movement to background check all males before they are allowed to talk to women online.
Shockingly, despite all the focus on divorced dads’ rights, no rich divorced father has donated significant amounts of cash to the cause of father’s getting more rights in an anti-male society One probable cause for the lack of interest in funding: Fathers’ Rights advocates have “cause-linked” themselves to social conservative politics despite the fact that social conservative “think tanks” like the Heritage Foundation have completely turned their back on men (and won’t recognize that their betrayal of men has caused them destruction in two consecutive elections).
This unecessary “loyalty” to a social conservative movement that hates men would explain, for instance, why Paul McCartney, after being trashed by Heather Mills in a divorce involving massive amounts of money, wouldn’t consider funding an MRO.
5) Most important of all, before the current financial crisis, almost all competent and talented management-oriented American males were fully occuped in their business careers. Only two alpha males have, until now, chosen to make a full-time career out of fighting for men’s rights in the USA: Glenn Sacks and Marc Rudov.
In the context of the above factors that have hindered funding for the MRM, we should look with some concern at the rise of Hillary Clinton as the US Secretary of State.
We all know that Hillary Clinton is going to make “Sex Trafficking” her number one foreign policy concern while in that office and nobody in the US media will bother trying to parse her radical feminist definition of what “sex trafficking” is (it includes all women who voluntarily want to marry American men and all women who voluntarily strip or do massages). Quite simply, she will continue the Bush policy of trying to get foreign countries to arrest any American male who even wants to say hello to foreign females.
Like Bush’s people, she will use blackmail to get third world countries to adopt their own versions of the viciously anti-male International Marriage Broker Regulation Act (IMBRA blocks online contact between Americans and foreigners until after the foreigner reads the background check report of the American) and the unconstitutional Violence Against Women Act (VAWA encourages dishonest foreign women to marry American men and destroy them). Bush’s people recently worked hard, and thankfully failed, to get the Finnish and Estonian parliaments to pass laws where any American caught with a prostitute would be arrested and jailed with the prostitute (defined as a slave to the patriarchy) being allowed to run free to snare her next victim. Hillary’s people will be more motivated to get draconian anti-male laws passed at least in the pro-Hillary leftist third world.
Hillary will be able to count on the American “Christian” right to support her on all of the above.
Some American male Republicans can hopefully look at Hillary’s position as Secretary of State as finally killing the unholy alliance between McCain supporters and Hillary supporters (PUMAs).
Too bad McCain himself is now pledging to maintain the alliance.
Considering that, even after punishing Repubican traitors at the polls, American men simply cannot trust Republican politicians to be on their side, the MRM is going to need the support and attention of a lot of American Democrat males plus the attention of the non-anglo-saxon male world if they are going to stop the Hillary feminist juggernaut when she becomes Secretary of State in January.
What can men do now? Here are some thoughts:
1) Misguided notions of chivalry and morality, especially trains of thought that promote male on male violence, have to be fought everywhere. A month ago I noticed that half the male commenters on Glenn Sacks blog were defending the way a father hit a young naked male over the head with a lead pipe who was found in his daughters bedroom. Men can work to keep the Republican Party on an “individual rights” track and not continue on the “chivalry and morality” track that has caused Republican politicians to work against us.
2) Hillary’s rise to US Secretary of State should finally end the unholy alliance between Republicans and Hillary supporters. Her ascendancy now can be seen as Obama giving her (and the feminists) the Presidency itself. Remember that Joe Biden, the VP, is completely in the camp of anti-male feminists (I assume via some serious blackmail involving his previous interns). While I state that her rise SHOULD end the unholy conservative-feminist alliance, note that the neoconservative (neocon) Weekly Standard is already overjoyed that “their woman” is now about to take charge of US foreign policy and continue the Bush foreign policy with all its pro-victim-feminist aspects.
3) Men’s Rights forums and blogs, especially Mens News Daily under its new editor, should work hard not to pigeon-hole themselves as “right wing blogs” and “bastions of social conservatism” for an American society where most social conservatives seem to be bitter old women who hate young single men (especially the desires of the young single men) and seem to be leading their impotent husbands along on a leash (noting that most MRM activists are socially conservative males, it should be obvious that not all socons fit the above description of wimps).
4) Most important, because of the financial crisis and the temporary upheavals it has created, there is a limited window of opportunity where some of the readers and commenters of MRM blogs and forums will be CEO types who are available now to lead a funded MRO.
I am an example of someone who would be available to lead a funded MRO.
But here is why time is of the essence in getting an MRO funded now:
I was recently in a meeting with potential foreign investors for several ideas I had for a new enterprise.
One of those ideas was a Russian-funded MRO that would attack US feminism.
The men in the room said “That is a great idea”.
The one female in the group of investors then said “Let’s fund that other idea instead”…and the conversation turned. She wasn’t a feminist herself…she just liked the idea of funding matters that fit her interests more.
This shows that, because of someone like her, I (and many other managerial types) can soon be diverted (bribed) into another line of work than fighting for men’s rights.
