Where Are All the Men’s Organizations?
This question is something I’ve been thinking about lately. Considering that half the population is male, it would make sense for any country to have lots of men’s organizations. Still, I don’t seem to be able to find them. Now, it’s not that we don’t have any men’s organizations of course, because we do, for example the following kinds:
- Father’s rights organizations
- Organizations where men practise commitment and accountability (à la Promise Keepers)
- Ethnic organizations for men (Million Man March)
But these aren’t really the kind of men’s organizations I’m looking for. Where are the large, coherent organizations that stand up for men’s rights, and speak up about how the male gender role affects men negatively? Wikipedia has a list of women’s organizations, but the list of men’s organizations is conspicuously absent.
The absence of strong men’s organizations became painfully evident recently in Sweden when there was a prominent debate in the media about male circumcision (there is no Swedish tradition to circumcise men, but we have lots of Muslim immigrants and also a small Jewish community that practise circumcision). The only ones who spoke up against male circumcision were a few male surgeons who refused to perform the procedure, even though the Swedish government has ordered hospitals to offer this service to those who want it. A survey later showed that two thirds of surgeons were reluctant to circumcise healthy boys.
Anyhow, the main point is that no men’s organization spoke up because there are no men’s organizations in Sweden that could speak up. Where the men’s groups should have been, was only a compact vacuum.
This is a stark contrast to the numerous women’s organizations that exist in Sweden, feminist or otherwise. The end result is that male circumcision is still allowed in Sweden, even though female circumcision has been banned for almost three decades (Swedish people don’t practise that either, but some African immigrants do).
The more I work with men’s issues and issues of gender equality, the more I realize that no substantial progress will be made until men self-organize into larger units that can then speak out for men’s rights. Individual efforts are great, but in the long run organizations have more staying power than any one individual.
Pelle Billing is an M.D. who writes and lectures about men’s issues and gender liberation beyond feminism.
| More from Pelle Billing
Stumble It!
September 17th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Pelle-
Your column here brings to mind a question that I have been seacrhing for an answer to for a very long time.
The question stated simply is this:
Why is it that baby boomer American men have embraced the female archetype so strongly and have been so willing-eager even-to throw their own gender under the bus-especially boys-their succeeding generations, their male offspring.
American women bond strongly with their daughters-they prepare them for a life that includes existing with males. They condition their daughters to learn how to deal with males-and to influence males.
Women as they get older often bond with other women when issues involve other men. I recognize there are complications here but I think it is fair to say that women exhibit a “pack mentality” when it is men they are dealing with on the other side of an issue.
Having said that-baby boomer men do not bond strongly with their male offspring, or other younger generation males (or other men)-at least not in any meaningful way other than teaching them to ultimately be good mules for women and society at large. There is no pack mentality of any kind that I can see. There are no strong masculine rituals and identity as say in Sparta of ancient times. Now that may have been extreme-and even then men were expected to give their lives to Sparta. Not much about that has changed today-men are expected to be America’s cannon-fodder to protect the homeland. But what I’m getting at is that there is nowhere near the bonding of men and the younger generations of men as there exists with women today in America. Everywhere I look I see baby boomer men as weak examples for masculinity. THAT may contibute to the lack of men’s organizations.
The easy answer is that this problem can be sourced to mis-placed chivalry. But I suspect it runs much deeper than that. It seems to me that many of these baby boomer men are conflicted in some way with being masculine. A truly masculine knows his truth and does not give a damn what others think. Baby boomer men seem to have been apologizing for being male all of their lives.
Your thoughts?
September 17th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
So Pete, when are you going to join the National Organization for Men?
We’re the oldest men’s and father’s rights organization in America. I’ve been a member for roughly ten years. Getting other men to join and work for men’s and father’s rights is like pulling teeth – very difficult.
We have a few dedicated members who have literally made Herculean efforts to advance men’s and father’s issues. Most notably, former NCFMLA President Marc Angelucci, who just last year won a case against the state of CA. It seems CA was telling men that CA didn’t need language in CA laws that says men are victims of d.v. and need services.
This past June F4JLA teemed up with NCFMLA and we picketed the downtown courthouse – again. We are in the process of getting the video releases signed, but even when men show up for events, it’s difficult to get more than a few to set things up and help with logistics.
Why don’t men join men’s groups? Why don’t more men ACTIVELY work for men’s and father’s rights? Because they’re conditioned to be disposable and compete with other men. In roles outside the workplace, men are conditioned not to help each other, or work together in a way that would advance other men, IMO. Yea, let’s get collaborate. Let’s get organized. Let’s ACTIVELY work for men’s and father’s rights – even if we are all member of an army of the walking wounded – wounded by radical feminist laws, policies, curriculum, etc.
September 17th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Men are conditioned by Nature to defend women, protect them and provide for them. Men are still reeling in shock at the attack of Feminism and do not seem to want to speak out against women.
There have been several attempts to get an International Men’s Organisation up and running, but all have come to naught through the lack of a coherent philosophy and aim, and the infighting by egos. That and a poor understanding of how to assign responsibility for Feminism between its leading players, its hangers on, its ‘women-in-general’ disaffection for men and the Political front that feminism has.
A salient part of the problem lies in that very ‘provision’ aspect. Men have provided much of the financial wherewithall for women’s groups, but seem unwilling to invest in men. Men with the most to gain from fighting back are the ones who have been stripped of resources enough even to support themselves.
September 17th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
I have been living in Sweden since 1994, and am familiar with some of the men’s fathers’ rights orgs here. First, to the question of circumcision – I don’t see it as a hot topic. Circumcision is optional, not forced in Sweden. I am aware that there are those who oppose it generally; but since it’s not forced, what would the protest be about? (BTW: It’s also been a strong Christian tradition.) There are some doctors who refuse to do it. OK. Who cares?
I see absolutely no reason for men to jump up and bust their butts to create and maintain a masculinist movement for the sake of keeping up, point by point, with the feminists. What for? The only reason I can think of is engaging in far-left politics – nothing to do with any actual concern for or intent to benefit men. Feminism is part of a far-left political movement. An equivalent masculinist movement would also be part of a far-left political movement. If that’s what you’re looking for, why not just join the feminist movement?
Sweden has a different political system, much more strongly oriented toward democracy than probably any country, but certainly much more so (by a Swedish mile) than the US. Consideration of the feminist perspective is fully incorporated in the process – but so is everything else. So, the greater issues related to feminism are just churned through along with everybody else’s perspective; those of men included. Tons and tons of discussions related to feminism or including a feminist perspective have been on Swedish television over the past few decades; with people engaged in debate and providing counter-argument. The debate has never been one-sided. I even wrote an article about one of their current issues (was at the time). Maybe I can find it and post the link.
Feminists broke away from The Left Party when a man was elected as its leader (who quickly came right out and said how much he liked communism and didn’t have to hide it behind the feminist label). The feminists formed their own separate party and were unable to get elected to even a single seat in the parliament. Their televised party convention was a goofy hate-fest. Why would men – other than goofy men – want to emulate that?
September 17th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Actually, going through my list, bumped my memory. I’ve written a bunch of articles on Sweden. Some salient points:
Open public response to a Swedish ambassador’s anti-male statement.
Swedish Fathers-4-Justice protests didn’t catch on – because Sweden’s laws are pretty fair (they actually went the opposite direction – providing gov. supported leave for parents – mothers AND fathers).
Sweden rejected the anti-male child support reforms, and divided government support between the two parents.
Feminist professor investigated for goofy feminist research – which was characterized as unscientific – and fired.
… it goes on.
September 18th, 2009 at 1:10 am
I hate to say it, but I will. Men are stupid.
Most of them WANT to be subservient to women. Most men buy into the “take it up the ***” school of chivalry in which manliness is defined by how much **** you take from women rather than how little.
It’s true, nothing will happen until men organize. Men won’t organize until they stop being stupid. That’s not happening anytime soon.
September 18th, 2009 at 2:34 am
I don’t know the answer to Pelle’s question. I certainly think there is a dearth of such organisations. That said, although I can not quantify it, I do feel there is none the less considerable resistance to feminism. This resistance comes from people who would not ever consider calling themselves MRAs. Some just form a sort of ‘awkward squad’. Such people can and will in little ways sabotage feminism just by a measure of non co-operation. I also see a massive amount on the Internet which shows men (at least some of them) are not putting women on pedestals and deferred to then in a way that others might suggest. This might be termed sexual exploitation by some but I see it as men exploring their own sexual agenda. Even if you don’t see it this way I think such activity does indicate a rejection of the feminist paradigm.
September 18th, 2009 at 3:47 am
Roger, you live in Sweden. The country where the ‘men’ are now being taught to sit down to urinate so that they do not ‘oppress women’…LOL! Where men are trying to express milk to feed babies?
http://malechauvinist.blogspot.com/2009/09/more-farcically-bad-news-from-sweden.html
http://malechauvinist.blogspot.com/2009/09/should-men-breastfeed-in-public.html
Sweden is very possibly the most feminised country in the world. I have been there many times. I have quite a few swedish friends. We’ve had a few interesting conversations about these topics.
September 18th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Men will organise and form groups well enough in many areas. Where do you think all the sports leagues come from? A corporation is essentially a group of men organised in pursuit of a common aim, and there is certainly no shortage of corporations. Many of them very big and successful. Maybe sometimes too big and successful. So yes, we can organise and make it work unbelievably well.
But men will not join any organisation that even hints at being opposed to women – even the worst kinds of women, behaving in the worst way. Or against the supposed interests of women, even where those interests have no moral or logical basis and consist of little more than a desire for spiteful revenge on men.
Men who have every reason to unite against gross injustice, who have been screwed in the divorce and family courts and have lost that which is most precious to them, stilll fail to join groups fighting against the very injustice that has robbed them. It is as Amfortas says – we are conditioned to protect and nurture females, not unite against them. We find it unnatural and we are uncomfortable with it. So we remain largely divided.
For the present, at least.
But being divided does not have to mean being defeated. It is possible to resist at an individual level; something men – who are far more individualistic and self-sufficient than women – are particularly good at. At present, that is how the movement is developing. Being disorganised has its weaknesses, but there are some surprising strengths. Like the fact that without any organisational head, our enemies have no target to attack.
September 18th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Kanuk, that’s an excellent blog. I especially liked this:
“I say it is inevitable as civilizations grow strong women will be given the vote. And, when women get the vote, it is inevitable they will eventually gain power in the political system. And, when women gain power in the political system, it is inevitable their demands for more and more protections and safety and benefits and freedoms and punishment for any man who offends them will destroy the civilization. I said in the late 90’s, that I believed it is impossible to save this society. Women have never voluntarily given up political power once they get it. And, men have never been able to organize to take things back. Never.”
That’s about right.
September 19th, 2009 at 2:37 am
Roger F. Gay,
Perhaps you live in Sweden, but you seem to misinterpret everything that’s going on. The feminist professor who said that rich men kill babies during secret rituals, was fully reinstated, and is still doing “research” in a very well respected university (she’s not “goofy”, she actively promotes hatred of men).
Government support to children is *not* given to both parents, it is given to the mother, even though the father has the same parental responsibilities.
Circumcision is optional, not forced in Sweden. I am aware that there are those who oppose it generally; but since it’s not forced, what would the protest be about? (BTW: It’s also been a strong Christian tradition.) There are some doctors who refuse to do it. OK. Who cares?
Are you kidding me? You’re saying who cares that defenseless male babies are mutilated without having their own say in it? Your attitude scares me, and this last attitude of yours cannot even be attributed to cultural confusion and not understanding what is happening in Sweden.
September 19th, 2009 at 2:50 am
Author: Jeff
Comment:
“I hate to say it, but I will. Men are stupid.”
Well Jeff, there are plenty of them, yes……but I’d be more generous and just say they are ‘thinking with the wrong head’..LOL!! I did that myself as a younger man….it’s part of our nature.
September 19th, 2009 at 5:51 am
Why is it that everybody agrees telling girls and women they are no good not only damages them but creates women who are no good, but almost zero men or women who believe relentless male-bashing creates bashworthy males. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy that needs to stop.
There is nothing wrong with males taking action in order to meet a basic need for sex, any more so than a woman taking action in order to meet a basic need for everything she can possibly imagine she can get for herself. It doesn’t make her smart and him stupid, it just means she is far more entitled.
The worst problem comes in when men have no useful channel for their sex drive, such as raising children with a loyal wife, which is what happens in every matriarchy, and why all of them eventually collapse.
September 19th, 2009 at 6:07 am
It has nothing to do with men being stupid. Men naturally dont have a need to complain. We are da ones that most of the time keep quiet and let things go as long as it doesnt have a direct effect on what we’re trying to accomplish. For years we let women complain and let them complain without debating their logic.
But now we live in a world where everything is geared and catered towards the upliftment of women for the last 20 years. So now that the balance of power is shifted. And yes I will say “power”. We as men have become the women. We cannot get jobs or any financial assistance. We have lost our power. The balance is shifted. With everything in life there is a balance and it has been shifted because we were too silent for too long. And unfortunately we allowed our women to raise this current generation with no real sense of what being a man is. 20 to 30 years ago a man was and is different from a man in this day n time. There was a differnt upbringing, a different sense of morality n values were instilled in young boys preparing them for manhood. And the resources and rewards that were given to one as a way of validation indicating you were ready to be a man are now just being given away.
But to sum it all up, we as men have been too quiet. The only way to gain our respect back, and yes i will say “respect”. Is to be feminine and start complaining as they do. Society is starting to accept the ideology that what we do as men are wrong, and what they do and think as women is correct. There’s justification in what they do, but no justification in ours???
September 19th, 2009 at 9:39 am
paul parmenter Says:
“It is as Amfortas says …. we are conditioned to protect and nurture females, not unite against them. We find it unnatural and we are uncomfortable with it. So we remain largely divided.”
Actually, I disagree. Having been through this myself my testimony is:
1. Any woman you talk to will.
1.1. Sprew hatred at you courtesy of the misandry in the media.
1.2. Blame the man for ‘making the woman be spiteful’.
1. Any man you talk to who has not been through this will say:
1.1. You must have not been ‘man enough’ to keep princess happy so its your fault.
1.2. You must have been a failure of some sort.
1.3. There is no way what you are saying could possibly happen. The courts can not break the law.
1.4. You just need to ‘get over it’ and go out and find a good women. There is one out there for you.
I would talk to men about kidnapping, unlawfully frozen bank accounts, court documents being sent to third parties in an effort to destroy my company, collusion of lawyers and judges etc and men just say “nope, it can’t happen, you are making it up, you are just playing ‘victim’, you must have upset the judge..blah, blah, blah.”
With men it is really simple. Until someone shoves the truth down their throat so far they are ready to puke they will not believe it if it goes against their programming. WILL NOT HAPPEN.
Also, remember, the media, being totally controlled by the Illuminati, will not report the abuses of FC. They do not even report the massive suicide epidemic going on all around the world. When was the last time you read and article in the SMH about the massive number of men committing suicide? NOT EVER that’s when. A woman loses her hamster and it makes the news in the UK. 100 men kill themselves and it does not get a mention ANYWHERE. The media is the major ‘programming’ tool of the Illuminati.
Men who are attacked by vicious wives are themselves then attacked endlessly. You only have to go here http://blogs.smh.com.au/lifestyle/asksam/ to see how much I am attacked for posting the truth of the matter. Few men have my ‘backbone’. This is why you see few men turning up at MRAs. What’s the point. You are labelled a woman hater, misogynist, dead-beat dad and you have a small penis and you can’t get laid…;-)
Oh..lets not forget…even in places like this a few sarcastic comments have been slung at me when well evidenced opinion is put in front of people. (eg. “Women have the intellectual capacity of 7-10 year old boys” was rebuked without evidence despite the fact pretty much ANY man has a mountain of this evidence in his life.) How about that? MRAs slinging dubious comments based on lack of knowledge. Why would you guys blame ‘normal’ men for doing the same?
The other problem is most MRAs are subverted. I am well aware that most of the leading MRAs are working for the bad guys. We have many traitors in our midst. In short….huge efforts are being expended AGAINST MRAs.
Author: DcFather
“Why is it that everybody agrees telling girls and women they are no good not only damages them but creates women who are no good, but almost zero men or women who believe relentless male-bashing creates bashworthy males.”
“Critical Theory”. This was invented at the Frankfurt School. In it’s simplest form it means to constantly criticise any institution that brings strength to western society. Men and fatherhood are two of those things. So they must be criticised at ever opportunity relentlessly in order to destroy western society. Ditto religion. Political Correctness was a tool of the communists and it come to the west as part of ‘Critical Theory’.
Here, you can watch a good video about it here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5Z_kZksn3E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3owAO_aChGQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbx9RLE81rE
I would have thought that everyone here was well aware of the role Gramisci and Marcuse played in the injection of feminism into the western world. This has been talked about by Bill Woods for years and years. I would have thought that even if people here did not believe Aaron Russo testimony that Nick Rockefeller said the Rockefellers were behind feminism that EVERYONE would certainly know that feminism was central to the Communist Manifesto.
I mean EVERYONE who has done any study on feminism has read the communist manifesto which says women should go into the workplace and children should be raised by the state. ALL the leading feminists were communists first. What I could not figure out is how feminism became ‘main stream’ from Marcuse and the ‘New Left’. That took real money. I believe Aaron Russos testimony. Though many do not.
September 19th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Ray, do you mean this NOM? http://orgformen.org I remember when it was formed, so it was within the last 7 years. Marty told me at that time they would not be accepting memberships. This is why you don’t see men joining.
I’ve always seen http://ncfm.org as the largest men’s organization and http://f4j.us and http://fathersandfamilies.org as the largest active fathers organizations.
By the way, which Ray is this?
September 19th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
It is a shame. There is a dearth of male organizations, and what organizations there are, are not very popular. It may be that men don’t feel oppressed, generally. Without the oppression, there is little need to fight to change something.
As for circumcised men, there are organizations, for example the National Organization of Restoring Men http://www.NORM.org which is primarily composed of circumcised men restoring their foreskin. Because Sweden is mostly intact, there is little need for such an organization. There are other intactivist groups in the US, but again, not currently widely accepted. For example, there is
http://www.DoctorsOpposingCircumcision.org
There are even social networks for restoring guys, such as http://www.RestoringForeskin.org
http://www.NoCirc.org
http://www.NoHarm.org
September 19th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
“I would have thought that everyone here was well aware of the role Gramisci and Marcuse played in the injection of feminism into the western world. ”
Well-I can’t speak for “everyone”, but I was the first here at MND to discuss The Frankfurt School and it’s legacy here in the U.S.. That was years ago.
Go to:
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2005/08/15/islam%e2%80%99s-debt-to-christianity/comment-page-1/#comment-8584
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/04/radical-feminists-useful-idiots/
As you know Gramisci and Marcuse were principals of The Frankfurt School. I posted discussion of The Frankfurt School back in 2005 in 2006. Know maybe not everyone posting here remembers, but long time readers of MND do.
Some excerpts
“I too believe that the feminists are useful idiots. The first casualty in this has been men and boys. But women will be paying a noticeably bigger price now and in the future.”
“Ironic, isn’t it that the true power is not an invisible “patriarchy” but the fact that marxists and capitalists have gone to bed? Similarly, governments and corporations have also gone to bed.”
“Steven, I recommend that you do some future research about The Frankfurt School. This was a Marxist school made up of philospohers and other elites at the time, in Germany, around the 1920s. They fled Germany during Hitler’s reign (he actually gave them incentives to leave as he hated marxists) and set up shop in the U.S., notably at Columbia University in NYC. ”
“They gained a lot of influence with elites in this country, including the government, corporations, universities, and foundations. If people wonder why the rich and famous considered marxism “chic” in the 1960s, and why so many activists then had marxist leanings, well, The Frankfurt School had much influence on this.”
“Graduates of The Frankfurt School at Columbia reached high places within governmnet, corporations, universities, foundations. The goal of The Franfurt School was replacing the current social order with what we see today. The Family was one of their main targets. They have realized most, if not all, of their goals from 60 years ago.”
“It’s all about raw power. The family is the greatest force against a powerful and dominating government. A strong family needs only one car, one house, one refrigerator, one….on and on. Broken or non existant families doubles the market for goods and services. Again, the government and corporations work together and the marxists and capitalists work together. Since corporations look like a snapshot of a socialist organization today, one could say that the capitalists have become socialists in how they run the business. But socialists too enjoy money (for themselves and their shareholders). In the past, corporations promoted women’s issues (affirmative action). Now they’ve taken things to the next step: diversity. This will soon include, gays, lesbians, transgender groups targeted for privilege. Other groups have already been welcomed into the Diversity Tent. (Sorry, Caucasian males are still banished to the plantation).”
“Another area in which corporations and government work together is in labor supply. Rapidly doubling the workforce as was done when women entered in large numbers will drive down incomes. This benefits corporations. And again, it is government who is the front-man for corporations, as it is the governmnet who enforces affirmative action. Look at the illegal alien situation tody. The government is doing the dirty work for business to keep a steady supply of even more cheap labor. The government does not give a fig about “citizenship”, the middle class, or the taxpayers that make it possible for the government to even operate. They work for the corporations. Raw power. In the hands of a few.”
“”You say,”"
“The nuclear family is in trouble (although in fairness this is due more to the collapse of real, debauched-dollar-adjusted wages forcing both parents to work).”
“The issues of feminism and “debauched-dollar-adjusted” wages are related. (This is the only disagreement I have with your column.)
Look at business going to China. Socialists and capitalists can work together when they can serve each others interests. These people do not give one damn about America. They easily could (and will someday) sell out the market (and the country) that made them what they are today for more raw power.”
“The women have been duped for 40 years. They have created a nightmare for the men and have also created their own nightmare. The true invisible powers don’t care about God, Country, Family. Just their own raw power for global dominance.”
September 20th, 2009 at 4:37 am
Sherry Peel Jackson and Joe Banister (both former IRS agents and Certified Public Accountants) have said that 67 million people are not paying federal income tax.
Check them out on youtube. Watch all of their videos. Also watch Freedom to Fascism and Larken Rose’s Theft by Deception to learn more.
Participation in the men’s/father’s rights movement is important, but it’s not enough. Get involved, or kiss your freedom goodbye forever.
September 20th, 2009 at 7:03 am
As far as it it is possible to define I am a MRA. At one time I did belong to an organisation and was even a local organizer. However, my membership was short lived. The problem was that apart from anti-feminism we had no common ground. They came with a lot of other political baggage that to me was repulsive.
Now I find Paul Elam’s writing inspirational and compelling. Similarly I often read comments which are both educational and illuminating.
But there is a lot of other stuff which quite frankly put me off. May be others are like me. I want to oppose feminism but when I start reading pieces which go on moaning about ‘commies’ or ‘Marcuse’ then I think I am just amongst right wing neocons who may be are also anti-feminists. They also go on about America and its greatness. Well I am not in America and to me my allegiance is to men not some idea of American greatness. In fact I am more drawn to men in the Middle East than I ever would be to men in the USA since they have shown themselves far more protective to manhood than most other have.
September 20th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Paul-
if you don’t see the connection between Marxism, Marcuse etc. and feminism then you are the one who is blinded by politics. There is nothing in my posts about American greatness-or anything about America. It’s Marxism against the West. Pull your head out of your ass. I’m no neocon and what I post transcends country. Feminism and it’s political power today has it’s roots in The Frankfurt School. What we see all around us from feminism is exactly as they planned it-going back decades. You have two problems: 1.) you are blinded by your own biases in that you intepret that which is not in my posting, 2.) you are very ignorant about history and the connection between Marxism and feminism. I have no party loyalty as I believe the two parties in the U.S. have more in common with the mob than anything else. I believe America is in decline-and deservedly so. I see no reason to restore America on the backs of American men. Let it collapse. My loyalty is first and foremost to the men-not the country.
September 20th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Author: Denis
Comment:
“Well-I can’t speak for “everyone”, but I was the first here at MND to discuss The Frankfurt School and it’s legacy here in the U.S.. That was years ago.”
Denis, great to see. Loved your post. I had not seen that. I only discovered this after I went looking for it.
The next connection I made was the Harrimans and Bushes to the Nazis (grandfather bush even had his bank taken off him for giving the nazis so much support). Not many people know that the Rockefellers and Harrimans funded and provided invaluable assistance to the Nazis. Not many people notice that the Nazi symbol ‘fascai’ which dates back to Roman times were placed into the US Congress in 1948 just to let ‘the faithful’ know that the same people who backed the Nazis were well and truely in charge of the congress. Sigh..talk about ‘hide in the open’.
The connection after that was Kruchevs outburst (obviously planned) against Nixon in the famous ‘Kitchen Debtate’ in 1959 of “we shall destroy you from within” so it was clear that the Soviets were backing Marcuse. And the last little piece of the puzzle was to find out that Jacob Schiff used to live in the Rothchild house in Germany and it was Schiff who funded Lennin and Trotsky…it was brother Warhberg who organised the famous ’sealed train’ across Germany….and it was the Rothchilds that funded Morgan and Rockefeller. Closed loop.
It was then obvious that the Rothchilds funded and organised world war I, the Russian Revolution, the Frankfurt School, Marcuse and crew AND the Rockefellers….so Aaron Russos testimony as a dying man that Nick Rockefeller stated the Rockefellers funded and supported feminism rings very true to me.
Once all these things are tied together it is clear that the ‘real enemy’ are the guys at the top. Not women. Exactly as your article points out. The only slight disagreement I would have is about the socialists and capitalists getting in to bed together. They were always the same crowd. The Rothchilds funded the Communist Manifesto right from the start.
Author: Paul
“But there is a lot of other stuff which quite frankly put me off. May be others are like me. I want to oppose feminism but when I start reading pieces which go on moaning about ‘commies’ or ‘Marcuse’ then I think I am just amongst right wing neocons who may be are also anti-feminists.”
Paul, whether you like it or not. Are put off by it or not. The Illuminati run all political parties and all governments. There is only one agenda. They created the ‘two party# system to fool people into thinking their vote counts. It doesn’t. The UN is the mechanism by which they run these governments. They tried first in 1815 after they sponsored Napoleon. Then again in 1919 with the League of Nations after the created WW I, then again in 1945 with the UN after they created WW II. They needed a supra national world power in order to subvert national sovereignty.
Feminsm, as you know it, was first written int the communist manifesto. If you have not read the communist manifesto I would recommend it to you. It clearly states that the family must be destroy and that in order to raise children with ‘equality’ they must be raised by the state. The communist manifesto is the plan the Illuminati are working to. All 10 major policies of the communist manifesto are implemented in the US today. If you knew what I knew, which would blow your mind, you would know that all western countries are already communist totalitarian states with the lie of ‘freedom’ put over the top as a thin veneer. Yes, I can prove that. They money system, once you know how it works, proves this. And they can’t hide the money system so they just lie about it instead and everyone believes the lies.
September 20th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
Actually Dennis my post was not just about your remarks. It was also about a new article that I had just read that ranted on about ‘commies’ and the like. Similarly my remark about America was not related to your post.
One of the troubles is that just because you use words like Marxism and Marcuse I don’t necessarily see the devil with hones and a tail. When I hear people using these words I just dismiss what they say as all to hysterical.
Marx and Marcuse if you want to just take two examples where both born in the West. Marx spent much of his time in the British Museum library researching for his works. He was born nearly 200 years ago in 1819 and was alive during Beethoven’s lifetime. He is buried in London. He produced philosophical works and ideas that like it or not are part of Western Culture, they are not separate from it. Actually I think rather than single out Marx a better target would be Jeremy Bentham. His utilitarian ideas pervade far more of our lives than Marx ideas do.
I came across Marcuse works may be in the early seventies. I can not exactly remember when. I saw them for what they are, works of philosophy and if you like political science. There are thousands of such works. Some catch on others don’t.
All that said you are probably right that feminist have founds some sort of moral base for their thinking the works of Marx and Marcuse. Though God knows they have plenty of their own literature. But then again the Klu Klux clan probable find a moral base for their thinking in the Bible.
‘Movements’ for want of a better word will always (or at least usually) look back and try to find ideas and thinking which they can use for their own purposes. But had Marx or Marcuse not exited I doubt that would mean there would be no feminism.
Any way you and Globalman can sort this out between yourselves.
September 22nd, 2009 at 7:42 pm
[...] A recent article on MND posted by Dr Pelle Billing asked the question Where Are All the Men’s Organizations? [...]
September 30th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Sir -
The world’s largest men’s rights organization is not in the west but formed in India – SIFF – Save Indian Family Foundation (saveindianfamily.org).
The model adopted by SIFF is voluntary contribution of time and skills to the cause of men’s rights. SIFF does not collect any funds, but encourages members to form men’s rights groups at the local level, but all of these groups operate under the umbrella group called SIFF. In less than four years, the group has grown to be more than 40,000 members. The members of the group have innumerable blogs that advance men’s rights and expose the excesses of Feminist fraud and its perilous effects on the society. I think the western mens groups have a lot to learn from SIFF operation in India.
October 1st, 2009 at 5:35 am
Interesting Kris. That’s certainly large. Perhaps it’s not surprising that it’s in India, which has such a huge population.
As far as I know, ACFC is the largest fathers’ rights organization in America. I don’t know that their membership figures are though.
Children’s Rights Council has an international organization, but mostly in the US.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Perhaps a better question is: Where are the men? From where I stand there are plenty of males around but I haven’t seen any real men lately who are willing to stand their ground and tell the females in their life NO and actually mean it.
As for the lack of male oriented organizations is concerned I had no idea that any existed until I bought my first windows based computer and ventured out onto the internet back in the nineties. Nor have I (as yet) found one with which I am comfortable joining and supporting; nor am I likely too since I am still married and not part of the divorce segment of the male population these organizations generally serve.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
That is a good question: where are all the men. Maybe it is because men, in general, are culturally more used to going it alone. I belong to a few foreskin restoration groups, but the members are few in number compared to the millions of men affected.
November 19th, 2009 at 2:42 am
India has far less sufferrers in family court then USA . the numbers that men’s organisations in India can gather is now more or less equal to womans organisations for any protests in spite of the money power provided by western male haters .
In fact it is a surprise why there are no powerfull mens organisations in USA
Is it the fact that western countries the male is merely wounded and then bled continously of money in family court
where as in India the culture of finish of the husbands creates more committed denisty of people for the cause.
And being a founder member of SIFF I can say that frankly we studied the responses of the western feminists and were ready in our arguments
But the key is not in quantity but in quality and we in India have acheived only 2% of what we have set out and need to achieve and by the way happy international mens day