Time for Some Male Bashing of Our Own

Thank you very much for your deeper understanding paul elam.

The whole story for decades in and out of politics has been about women ad infinitum.

We ourselves have unconsciously made female archetypes the logos around which our movement revolves and evolves. Just as society rotates around femaleness at large.

Let us from now henceforth make maleness and male archetypes of whatever characterisation the logos around which our movement revolves and evolves.

The mens movement has to be a movement that itself builds up, maintains and exports by propagation and dissemination a world view of maleness, by males for males.

In such a world no mangina would ever find room, grounds or possibilities to exist or betray his own genderclass by selling males out to females. It will be culturally impossible and a heresy to do so.

A generation of masculists has almost come and gone and few tangible gains have been made to liberate men from their disposability. All the while, women continue to get more and more, and gender feminists continue to demand more and more – as if they were more oppressed than men.

Paul I agree with you but will also go a step further. There are some who are just the oppoiste of the gender feminist. I have seen some who claim to be MRA’s that cheer when women die. I have seen some that have invaded forums because they said they were feminist when it was just a moms group. Worse of all, I have seen some actually plan an attack on those they do not agree with….illegal attacks. In one situation, these “MRAs” posted a phone number of a woman who they admit had just gotten out of the hospital for injuries when she was raped and said “let’s get her” I have seen some attack Dr Chuck Corry saying he was a feminist. Nothing surrpising about this though, they have told me I am a feminist and that I do nothing to help men.

Paul, one thing that sets MRA’s and FRA apart from the feminist, is that we police our own. If we do not speak out when someone does something wrong just because they are a man, we will be no better then the feminst that have brought these laws into place. The people that have done things like I described above could well be the next NOW poster boy to proof why they need even more laws which will take our rights away.

Of course, there is also a chance that many of these “poster boys” are actually women posing as an MRA or FRA to discredit all that we are doing.

I was just reading up on the Titanic tragedy:
55% of the children died,
25% of the women died,
80% of the men died.
All this because of the “women and children first” policy that was enforced at gunpoint, by men.
Several men were shot to death because they wanted to enter the lifeboats together with the women.
Shot to death by men, not by women.
And which right did these male feminists have to do this?
There is no law that says “women and children first”, with the death penalty behind it.
Even when recently a plane landed in the Hudson river, the captain said: women and children first.
That’s why it is clear that, by far, men’s worst enemies are the male feminists.
Without the violence of the male feminists, the female feminists have zero power.

Sometimes the truth hurts…

Good work Paul.

TMOTS

I just went to a counselor yesterday as I am having problems dealing with the June 2008 suicide of my 19 yearold son. I have been divorced from “EX” since Sept. 2001. The councelor, out of the blue, says, ‘You have been divorced a long time when are you going to get over your hatred for your “EX”. I replied to her that what she said was unfair and not objective, especially under these circumstances. The “EX” was abusive of myself and especially the children, mostly the son, after I was removed from the household. That the “EX” had just severely beaten my son in Nov. 2008 or taken me to court to pay the same bills for the 5th or 6th time didn’t matter. That the “EX” was abusive of both children and was free to disallow myself any parenting time also didn’t matter. All because I do not have a VAGINA!!!! All it takes is to stand up to this WRONG thinking and be able to justify your cause, and do it enough times, consistantly, and the tide will turn.

You had me until I read this paragraph:

“Instead of buying those tickets to the ball game, or that next 12 pack, send the money to a fathers rights organization…”

Nonetheless, Amen to that! Nice rant.

Not to be fussy, but spelling error at the end of this paragraph:

It will happen to more than half of you that get married, but somewhere along your way in life, you hung a vacancy sign on your common sense, and you are likely helping your sons hang that same sign on thiers.

missing apostrophe:
There are men our here trying to do for you and your sons what you wont.

missing e:
Or how about this? The next time you hear somone

I love the fire, but don’t forget the spell check. (at least the next morning)

@ Jon

Thanks. If misspelling were a crime, I’d be doing life.

Lonely Dad: Why are you seeing a FEMALE counselor? The majority of women in psychology are of the feminist persuasion – or at least try to be. All men are evil. All women are victims.

Well said.

I wrote this on Glenn Sacks…..I’ll post it here as well:

It’s HIGH time that SOMEBODY……ANYBODY files a LAWSUIT concerning the VAWA.

It is SEXIST…..it is based on FALSE TESTIMONY and STATS…..it is a CLEAR VIOLATION of the “accused” MANS constitutional rights…….it falls under the law enforcement definition of PROFILING…..it is sending BILLIONS of our TAX DOLLARS to fund this “Family Court” machine………it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL…..it is being used as a SILVER BULLET for custody more and more for leverage in family court promoted by the “WOMANS” attorney while a BLIND EYE is given by those in black robes…….it is NOT applied equally thus violating the EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE……..

What is so DAMN hard about this? Why has NO-ONE filed a FEDERAL CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT yet?

REALLY? I for one am sick of the TALK and COMPLAINTS about this issue……it’s about time someone grabbed the ol’ balls and FILES A FEDERAL LAWSUIT.

On a side note……I never watch Nancy Grace….but I happened to tune in for a second last night and they had the VAWA national director on……and it seems that women are still beaten every second in this country and the law enforcement system is STILL not taking violence against women seriously…….

That’s what we are up against………..FILE THE DAMN LAWSUIT ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A misplaced chivalry causes men to defend women regardless. In a nutshell thats what I come up against daily, along with the blissful ignorance you highlight.
Self effacing men simply want to sit down with the girl and say “Im not like other guys”……penis tawk

Great rant! Unfortunately the people who need to read it are most likely “too busy” watching the ball game or working their second job to pay the ex.

@Roger F. Gay–there is nothing wrong with seeing a female counsellor, some are very good. I went with two with my ex. The first one told me I should “be a man and…” I told her that she was sexist and left. The second woman was very understanding and evenhanded. Try not to judge people by the genitals they were born with.

A well written article.

Well, women went on strike and won’t give sex to anyone who disagrees with them.

We bought it and capitulated.

Now woman are a voting majority in the republic of ours and have taken over all public places of power. If not personally, by proxy. Obama/Clinton/Pelosi are the three woman incharge of our country.

The men I know call me a woman hater, the woman that love me like my 80 year old mother refuse to even discuss the matter. My niece who is graduating college and is headed for law school won’t even discuss feminism with me anymore, she has learned in college to ignore men like me.

Their victory is more than complete, it is total and now they are working on improving mind control of men.

Two articles in Slate and Salon talk about how men cannot even get erections any more, Glenn Sacks nailed it in a piece he wrote about these articles. In the comments in Salon today, male feminists that post at Salon even say that any male who self identifies as a feminist are crazy and suffer form self hatred.

What next, a tax on having a penis? Feminists openly say they want a beta male slave at home and a alpha for sex. My mother said that daily when I was growing up in the 60′s.

Paul, I don’t think you went far enough.

The feminists know that you are correct, on the Daily Show with John Stuart, all Pelosi had to say was, women, go into politics, her new book is all about that.

She knows that if men get a clue, her whole house of cards will come falling down.

But men want sex. Maybe need sex. At least occasionally.

Woman realized the desire of women for heterosexual sex would be the undoing of their movement.

They did not ignore it, they came up with a plan. Encourage a hook up culture, so young women can have all the indiscrimate, random, wild, group sex they want. And, if they don’t like it they can get a lifetime supply of money and put the guys in jail.

Or, the feminists explain, they could become lesbians, who cares whose rubbing your funny parts as long as you get off.

What does the MRM suggest for men? Nothing thats what. Well that will not work. Trying to have a “normal” relationship doesn’t work. So what do we offer: Nothing.

You all know what I’m getting at. Unless we are willing to offer something to men to get them to understand that we have more to offer them then they can get by licking the boots or their wives/mothers we are dead.

I had a conversation with my mother while visiting for the holidays. She has two grand daugters that are doing very well in college and four grandsons that are struggling.

She could care less about the boys, won’t admit there is a problem and doesn’t belive there is a 60/40 split on campuses.

She never will.

We will not get anywhere until we have something to offer.

I was asked to go to dinner with my brother, his girfriend and my brothers friends and their girl freinds. I said I would only go if the women sat at one table and the guys at another. I couldn’t stand to watch the gab fest of these three harpies.

But these guys do so they can get some.

I’m a good MRA who successfully fought and won custody of my son.

But I don’t get any. How much longer can I go? I don’t know, but I can tell you I know that I cannot continue to be an active MRA if I intend to “get some”.

And to LonelyDad, I would go as far as saying the only men in mental health that ever helped me were of Arab or Indian decent. Don’t go to an American counselor, they are either gay or neutered.

And those couselors did help me, more than my father ever did. He threatene to kill me if I even disagreed with my mother. And that is the truth, he went and got a gun.

In summary it’s a war. You will not get layed if you are in it. That is how it is. And for those of your who don’t want to lower yourselves to the level of feminists, you will lose. In war if they bring a knife, you bring a gun, that is war, and our lovely cute, sexy women folk hate you and want you in the street, suffering or, if they can’t have that, dead. So let’s be nice to them, that will make them change, keep telling yourself that.

I fight this war for my son. For me, I can’t wait to retire so I can emigrate and have a normal relationship with woman, that is , if there are any non-feminized coutries left. From what I hear, that is unlikely to be so as the feminists have turned their attention to those last remaining cultures that have not enslaved men.

Sound like we’re winning. No? Well we are not. I don’t think we have a clue.

Oh and by the way, the MRM has such solidatiry that I got kicked of Antimisandry for saying that women who abuse their children should get supervised visitation. Marx who runs the site personally kicked my ass for saying that, nice huh.

I’m nearly done fighting this as I don’t think men have the balls to fight. I will spend my energy encouraging my son to find a surragate to have carry his child and avoiding the company of women and mangina’s.

@Robert F. Gay

“The majority of women in psychology are of the feminist persuasion!”

Absolutely not. Not even the majority. In fact most psychologist/psychotherapist do not adhere to the feminist method of counselling and have other theories that they work with. I am guessing your statement is based on a misconception that “just because she is a woman she is a feminist” which is also distorted and inaccurate.

Paul Elam,
We neede to be hit on the head by 2 by 4 for a wake up call. But those men whose own ox is not beeing gored probably just by another pack of beer.
Bizzman662,
Federal classaction lawsuit was filed even before VAWA was enacted in the District Court of Maryland. Those men who signed a letter of intent of joining backed our for fear of legal fees and other issues and individual and organization were left holding the bag. To quote you.

“REALLY? I for one am sick of the TALK and COMPLAINTS about this issue……it’s about time someone grabbed the ol’ balls and FILES A FEDERAL LAWSUIT. ”
Why don’t you find lawyers and impacted men and file a federal class action lawsuit. Then watch how many men show up?

filing a lawsuit against VAWA and all the other “manhating legal frauds” is a good idea. But I have a better one!Teach men the law, especially the “law of voids” the truth is most actions by the courts are not legal or valid and can be challegened. This takes knowledge, it takes resources and mostly it takes guts!
First, start by looking up an old boy from Oklahoma, named Richard Cornforth, study his work and then start a local legal study group.
Pool our knowledge, resources and together challenge this God awful fraud. Once the knowledge is out, it can’t be put back into the bottle! Once women and the “terrorist” who back their little acts of selfishness and rebellion, learn this, that will wake people up. The truth will come out, those that have been quietly suffering will stand up.
When enough men do this, you will see change. Oh ,it will be a fight, those that have had it ” all their way” for soo long will not sit by and let their little racket fail, they will fight, but they are outnumbered and they are in the wrong. They will lose, just like the KKK and Nazi bigots have lost.
Feminazism will go the way of the dodo bird, the “out of control” family courts and the state will learn their place. We will have a fair, just and humane system to replace this God awful racket.
It is gonna be a long hard fight, but we will win! And one day in the not so distant future all this will be just some pages in a history book.

@ wannabevirginiawoolf

Interesting, my two decades in the mental health industry says just the opposite.

While practitioners may utilize various counseling methods, they are steeped in the feminist mindset during their education and in the subsequent trends of thinking in their field.

It infects their mentality with misandry, though I am sure little of it is intentional. I watched myself as books like “Courage to Heal” complete with all the bad science and distortions that feminists are well known for, was embraced in the mental health field as a sort of biblical reference for the treatment of sexual abuse victims, and even inspiring an insane rash of “repressed memory” hogwash.

The one point I tend to concur with you on, though, is that it likely does little good to get a male therapist. They are often just as or more indoctrinated than the females.

It is a really good idea for men to seek services from therapists who demonstrate a good understanding of men’s issues.

Many men that I have met that side with feminists/misandrist agendas – simply are not thinking. That is, they have been raised (culturally/socially programmed) to act this way. I’d have to say it is a fact that most people do not think in depth about things.

They are simply part of the scenery (mindless, programmed etc…).

I think that if truths are pointed out to these men, they will become allies of our cause. This will require much persistence. After all, it is difficult to overcome the way you were raised (programmed) from birth – for most people anyway.

If we come out guns blazing, and take an antagonizing role towards these men, I fear that we might end up just pushing them further into the scenery. Or worse, our enemies could use such antagonizing to their advantage.

We are fighting a mechanism – brainwashing – social and cultural programming, not individual people. It is the mechanism that has placed women on pedestals, and dragged men through the mud (whether they are aware that they are being dragged through the mud or not). It is the mechanism that places false “givens” into people minds – convincing them they do not have to think.

When I meet a man that takes a misandrist or feminist agenda, I ask him questions, to get him thinking. I point out incorrect facts he might possess – like “rule of thumb” or various domestic violence statistics etc…

The last thing I would do is call him a “mangina”.

Why?

I do not like male-bashing.

I never have.

I may be one of the ones you’re talking to, heavily participating in mens’ forums and usenet for the last decade, losing interest because attention keep moving towards aggravating gender relations. It seems this algorythm is often used as a tool to tie a persons ego to a product or a political movement.

Seeking the same ‘success’ for men that women have seen is not something I want to be part of. I cynically use ‘success’ because feminism has utterly failed as a humanitarian goal with 75% of women clinically obese, 80% of women on some type of anti-depressent and perhaps over 90% receiving some type of tax exception that favors the female gender. (<–stats are from observations in canada and in no way are official)

Some of the older feminist I do hold in high esteem viewing the cause as rigtheous and necessary… and 50 years too late because the poltical climate at the entry level is too corrupt at this stage of development.

In my opinion, the core issue has nothing to do gender, it's a lack of respect for other people's liberties (immoral but not illegal by American standards). I firmly believe that a self correction as a society and as a culture is now necessary.

I do find myself visiting sites for the occasional talking point and sometimes for rudimentary commonality. The plastic, the hoops to jump through, the punts from and to the other team hold no interest because it works towards something I find abominable. (and for now, life (rather, the threat of death) is taking over and my own set of priorities and interests are uncompromisingly overriding).

Some men are the biggest problems for ruining the lives of millions of other guys.

Look at Joe Biden a heartbeat away from running our country.

How many guys lives do you this he has destroyed?

Probably many thousands of times more than the worst feminists.

Now as a guy you have constitutional rights stripped from you thanks to him.

All for political power.

As I have been saying here at MND repeatedly, it’s not only the feminists. It’s also the powerful men who have worked with the feminists and have passed the laws that are dangerous to men and boys.

See the link below.

Yet another reason as to why marriage is a mistake. This is from France. The U.S. has already expanded the definition of DV to include “verbal assault”. This totalitarian world is getting downright scary.

“France to introduce new law banning ‘psychological violence’ in marriages”

By Peter Allen
Last updated at 3:40 PM on 05th January 2010

France will become the first country in the world to ban ‘psychological violence’ within marriage later this year.

The new law, which would also apply to co-habiting couples, would see people getting criminal records for insulting their loved ones during domestic arguments.

Electronic tagging would be used on repeat offenders, according to the country’s prime minister, Francois Fillon, who announced the law.

For complete story go to:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1240770/France-introduce-new-law-banning-psychological-violence-marriages.html#

For those that don’t get it…..Francois Fillon is a “guy”.

I agree with Richard. I do not think male-bashing is the answer. I do not know anyone who has admitted to having a problem by being bashed over the head with it. Calling an obese person a fat, ugly cow is hardly likely to make them go on a diet and if they do it will be for the wrong reasons. Telling an alcoholic he has a drinking problem is hardly likely to get him to change his behaviour. People do not change until they want to or need to change and that desire is fundamental to the quality of change they make.

Men who do not assert their rights are already weighed down by low self-esteem and a sense of powerlessness. The last thing they need to hear is how useless and ineffective they are as men. If we cannot galvanise men into action without putting them down even further then we also have a problem. Men who respond to the cause out of fear of being castigated will never be effective in helping the long term goals of men’s rights. Men need to feel their anger and not their worthlessness. The real issue for most men is why don’t they feel that anger? What has happened to them that makes them suppress one of the most basic instincts in human nature. More than likely if they do not feel anger in the area of men’s justice they do not feel it in other areas as well such as at work or in relationships with their family or other men. We need to get at the root cause as to why men are socialised to suppress their most basic instincts. Perhaps for many men it is too late but it is not too late to help the men of the future.

It requires a caring approach to tease out the reasons why a man has suppressed his feelings and denies his anger. Behind that behaviour lays a great deal of painful experiences for most men who often become that numb as a defence against aggression from their fathers and other men in their lives. Bashing them and telling them to wake up to themselves is not the way to go.

Hello Paul Elam,

I’m so glad that a man like you is forcing men to ‘get mad’ and to ‘get up’! I’ve been witnessing this disaster for nearly 20 years now…and I’m only a 32 year old black male. To add, the biggest mistake that we made was letting this whole ‘kill the man’ travesty wreak havoc…

I also commented on it on my blog.

Thanks for posting this…

Eman

Thanks MichaelT.

I sincerely believe that once these men are “woken up”, they will in fact be some of the biggest contributors.

And, as Michael said, calling somebody a FAT COW is not really a good way to make them want to lose weight. It is a good way to make them your enemy…

The last thing we need is more enemies – or more determined enemies.

I understand the anger and frustration involved here.

Trying to undo the damage done by the feminist mechanism makes me feel like…

A one-legged cat trying to bury a turd on a frozen ice pond.

It’s frustrating.

But we cannot let our anger and frustration alienate those that have had their minds poisoned by the feminist machine.

Is it their fault they have been bombarded with lies since childhood?

No.

We have to get them thinking – and remember – that we offer help to them.

Ultimately, we are on their side (after all, we are PRO-MEN) – it’s just difficult getting them to understand that.

We need a bus advertising campaign. This site reaches a limited audience.

Stockholme (SP?) Syndrome. Boys dependent on moms for love, cookies, praise, and also afraid of their awesome power move on to school where more women show up to teach boys how to “Treat women” Sunday school, cub scouts, women towering over the boys telling them to stand up when a woman enters the room, don’t’ use “those words” around women.

Boys see men kneeling to ask marriage or bowing down to kiss a hand. They see men in ads, no, not a man, just a hand with a gift from outside the frame, any man will do, she is demure/sexy as she takes the gift They see Victoria’s Secret angels. Boys see men raping and killing in the news, in movies, as they grow up. Shame and guilt and women’s power beat boys down. Men are taught that women “understand” these things and dumb old guys just don’lt… Males are told their pain doesn’t count and males are told not to cry or whine, – nice trick, afraid to speak up, afraid their voice will crack or a tear will show. Males hold it in and hold it in and a few blow up and we hear that it’s testosterone, patriarchy, when it’s stress, pressure, and impossible standards to live up to.

I don’t think MOST men are able to think about gender or how much they have sold out to get a pat on the head, a breast in their mouth, from mom or the women they spent so much money dating. Boys see fat, out of shape dads watching sports and going ga ga over cheerleaders who wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire…

People who are mildly depressed can work it out. Those in deep depression need a helping hand I think that with society allowing male bashing for 40 years – we are really dealing with a huge problem and … ya, male bashing by Elam… I get it. I will use his “rant” as I hand out applications to join the National Coalition of Free Men … hoping that I can sign up two or more this year. We need to get men reading MND and joining men’s groups and not giving up, ever… and we need to get MONEY to spread our message … feminists get millions to billions and we can’t get men to join a men’s group or support MND Just a hundred a year, … big deal but males won’t do it… pretty sad. Why can’t someone ask Micheal Douglas or Clint Eastwood or Jack N – all three have shown in films and interviews that they are “on to” feminists… ask them to fund US to help boys and men. Hey, Jack, Clint, whomever – afraid to do it publicly … we take anonomous donations. smile

steve delucca,
Very perceptive comment by you. Most of the points are right on the money, but this is the reality. Quote from you.
“We need to get men reading MND and joining men’s groups and not giving up, ever… and we need to get MONEY to spread our message … feminists get millions to billions and we can’t get men to join a men’s group or support MND Just a hundred a year, … big deal but males won’t do it… pretty sad.”
Worse, the same men that were helped years ago by father’s rights group are chasing ex-wives of their fellow men in social organizations for mixed genders, while complaining how raw deal they got on divorce. The men even bellyache how little they were helped, while contributing virtually nothing to MRA group.

Thank you for this Article. Fathers’ right to be a meaningful part of their childrens’ lives, have been eroded to the point of non-existence. My research suggests that this is a phenomenon consistent throughout the industrialized nations. Children who are alienated from their fathers are more likely later in life to have emotional/behavioral problems, suffer from depression, drop out of school, fail in their jobs, and suffer from other social problems. I invite you to visit my site devoted to raising awareness on this growing problem: http://fathersprivilege.blogspot.com/

I anticipated some mixed feelings about this piece. To be honest, I had some mixed feelings writing it. In the end, I think it is justified.

I tried for a while to wrap my head around the idea that men who refuse to defend themselves or their sons from systematic misandric abuse would somehow be alienated from the MRM for being called harshly on their unwillingness to act.

I’m not buying that one.

Men who will sit by idly and take a thrashing for all the wrong reasons are to be protected from stern judgement for the right ones? I don’t think so.

I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Deluca pointing to aspects of male socialization that lend men to denial and defenselessness. But that really plays to my point exactly. For lack of a better word for this I have made one up. I call it masculopathology- A state of numbness and defenselessness brought on by “normal” male socialization combined with male biology and misandric influences of modern culture.

I understand how things got that way, but I am not at all convinced that treating men like abused children is the way to address it. Nor do I think men respond well to such treatment.

I compare it to alcoholism in males, and it has very similar characteristics all the way down to the denial and the dependency on the very thing that is destroying you.

The best treatment approach I have seen for alcoholism in men wasn’t emotional baby sitting, rounds of tear jerking stories or group hugs, but rather they were better served with some pretty abrupt rattling from their complacency and being told from time to time that they needed to “take the cotton out of your ears and put it in your mouth.”

Certainly I am not suggesting such extremes as that, but I am saying that being overly concerned with delicacy in this case is like gently inviting someone to move out of the path of a speeding train.

If anything will shut off most men from a message it will be addressing them like they are helpless children more in need of coddling than in need of taking responsibility for their lives.

Harsh is harsh, but I will wager most men hear harsh with their dignity intact, even if it pisses them off.

The other thing is that I do feel strongly that what I said is TRUE. That still goes a long way with me and with a lot of men, I think.

And the last bit of this is that it really is important to look at the masculine roll in our own demise. It may feel better to stay focused on feminists, but if every feminist on the planet were gone tomorrow morning, we would still have a lot of problems that we point to all the time in the MRM.

Bruno,

That wasn’t enough, we had to follow up with things like “The Unsinkable Molly Brown” to show their heroism.

@Richard

‘The last thing I would do is call him a “mangina”.

Why?

I do not like male-bashing.’

Those men who shot other men trying to flee theTitanic only did so because they saw themselves as being chivalrous, as taking on the male (disposable) role that the men they were killing had ‘failed’ at. Statistics and reason aren’t enough to wake men up to the fact that it is not brave or masculine to allow yourself, your brothers, your sons, to be the disposable tools of women’s selfish needs.

The word ‘mangina’ is the greatest weapon that the men’s rights movement has yet developed.

@ Schoppenbecq
Yes, of course these men were trying to be chivalrous.
But the point is: they did not have the right to “filter” the access to the lifeboats to their own preferences.
And it certainly did not give them a licence to kill.
I wonder if, the men who shot other men trying to get into a lifeboat together with the women, were afterwards punished for these murders.
I don’t think so, because I cannot find any information about it.
They might have drowned also.
But if they survived, they should have been punished as the murderers they are.
Failing to do this, the legal system gives a carte blanche to this behaviour, in the future.
When the captain of the plane that landed on the Hudson, and who said “women and children first”, is being celebrated as a hero, we are doing the same thing.
He might be a hero for landing safely, but he is also a sexist, he discriminates, and he abuses his authority.
He should be severely sanctioned for this, because this mentality can cause stupid men to think it is OK to murder to defend the “women and children” policy.
Which is sexist, illegal and unconstitutional anyway.
Maybe all this seems unimportant, but wait until we are in a situation of emergency, and some guy thinks he has the right to shoot us.

Regarding the Titanic, we were told that the poor was most likely to have died while the wealth survived. That is not true. As Bruno pointed out, the common denominator of those who died was that they were male. The fact that 55% of the children died while only 25% of the women did, seems to indicate to me that women put themselves ahead of children.

A few years ago, the Oxygen channel had billboards in Chicago showing the Titanic with “Another reason why its good to be a Woman” It would appear that they recognized silently the sacrifice men made but they sure will not do it openly.

This article, posted elsewhere in a slightly different form, was what made me a fan of Paul Elam and brought me to MND; it’s a shame that the site doesn’t always stay on-message itself as well as this piece would suggest (Global warming? Rudov’s dating tips? Why are we here?!). This message needs to be spread, though; it, along with SingleDad’s correct assessment that women’s victory is total, emphasizes the need for men to stop pursuing relationships with women, for our own protection and for some hope of progress.

Paul Elam, your article is fine and well-placed. Indeed, I don’t have your patience. If more men could be bothered to take on the system, then more of them will discover how loathsome are the male cockroaches that crawl out of the woodwork to target them and deny them their rights. This is how reality works. If you don’t carry out your moral obligations, then you deny yourself the right to see things as they really are.

Examples regarding the Titanic illustrate my point. Why should we feel any compulsion to be gentle and speak in soft voices with the likes of these murderous manginas? Excellent point Bruno, they took it upon themselves to commit murder, a crime, that far exceeds the frailty of scrambling for self-preservation. By what law, what authority did these goons with guns deem that only women were entitled to scramble for the best seats?

@Schopenbecq

I agree that there are men that are hopeless – Todd Goldman comes to mind.

I understand the desire to make labels for such men too – those men are irritating. However, I think there is a difference between somebody who is outright malicious, and somebody who has been “conditioned” by society.

I believe the majority of the men who would be labelled as “manginas” are simply conditioned, and can be reasoned with. Our greatest weapon is TRUTH. By exposing the truth to these men, I think we will make allies. By engaging in name-calling, I believe we will make enemies.

I heard that Jessica Valenti is now using the word “mangina” – only her warped mind interprets it to mean “a pussy”.

“The word “mangina” is the greatest weapon developed by the Men’s Rights Movement” That is scary… The term “mangina” is nothing but a label – once the wrong people get a hold of it (like Jessica Valenti), its meaning will be skewed.

@Paul

I admire and respect everything you have done – this article included.

And I have a question:

An alcoholic drinks willingly at first. Once addicted, they have no control over their drinking.

Is this a slightly different scenario? I.E. the men who “behave badly” here, have had crud drilled into their heads since childhood (they had no choice).
Also, the crud that is drilled into their heads is not an addictive substance (like alcohol). In fact, it offers no euphoric effects – unless headaches are considered a euphoric effect…

Wouldn’t there have to be a difference in treating somebody who is addicited to a drug, and somebody who has been “conditioned” by society?

That is a question – not an argument – I am not the psychologist – you are!

P.S. Schopenbecq – I haven’t heard of your site yet – and unfortunately, my workplace is blocking it.

I’ll check it out when I get home. I am guessing it is another fine addition to the increasing hoard of anti-feminist sites out there…

@ALL

One of the most popular pieces that I ever wrote (which, according to Mike LS, increased donations to MND) was this piece, …

http://www.angryharry.com/esWhinyWimpyWetWhinger.htm

This endorses Paul Elam’s view that a kick in the butt is probably better than commiseration when it comes to activating men.

To Shattered Men

Odd, I can’t find any stats on how many women gave up their seats, or even desired to, for a child on those lifeboats. I’ll keep looking though.

Have you noticed, say in the last ten years, day care centers have been popping up like mushrooms, while none are going out of business? You should hear some of the horror stories of how the children and babies are treated in some of those places, by the women, of course. I have a family member who worked at one and she says most of the mothers are fully aware of this abusive treatment. Some mothers drop the children off and go to the movies, or go out with their boyfriend etc.. And much of it on our tab. But, that’s another story.

Iv’e been dealing with the public for forty years, about 95% being women in my type of business, and I can say without a doubt, by my observations in business and my personal life, most put themselves before children, including their own. So, it’s obvious where men rank in their minds.

To Paul

Just a bit on men standing up to women: The business I was in had to do with home decor, and one of the services we provided was lamp repairs. A women came in one day with a non operating lamp and made it clear that she was rather annoyed ( and amused), because husband wasn’t “smart” enough to repair it. I said to her, “although I find it easy to repair, being in the business, I’m sure he can do things which I can’t do. What does he do?” Her response was, “he is the superintendent of schools for Charlotte”. That’s Charlotte, NC, the largest city/sclool system in the state. She became silent. At least she “got it”.
As I approached the checkout at my local grocery store, the checker was complaining that her “husband doesn’t make enough money in his law enforcement job”. So, I asked her if he puts his life on the line in his work to protect us citizens”. I also asked her if she “lived in a nice house and if she, and her children had all the things that they needed from his income”. Her response was “yes”. My reply, in a loud voice so everyboby around us could hear was “then stop your whining”. She became silent.

I will mention only one more of the countless exchanges similar to the above which I’ve had over the years. A women, from my church at that time, knowing how I cared for my sick and disabled wife, said to me one day, “you’re a REAL man” , obviously meaning there are so few. My response was “there are plenty of real men out there, there just aren’t very many real women” She was shocked, but silent.

So, if more more men stood up to women, not that it takes a great deal of courage, the result would be obvious. If they are horney, so what, I know of no man who has never done without. They need to stop being a slave to their crotch, even more, stop being a slave to HER crotch. If they are terrified of her, and the Femistapo, they need to man up. I’ve been doing this kind of thing since I was in my teens, and I’ve never spent a day in jail, or even paid any noticible consequences.

So, I must say, compared to most guys today, although I’m in my senior years, I keep looking better and better in the mirror everyday.

One of the most basic rights that all men should have is the right to choose whether or not to assert their rights. If many men choose to sit in front of the TV and do nothing to change the unjust attitudes that exist in society then we must respect that. How we react to that decision is up to us.

It does not make sense to be angry with men for asserting their rights to opt out of men’s activism. How can we be angry when the whole point of our existence is to protect men’s rights? Just because they do not want to choose the same path as we do does not mean that our rights have been violated by them and that anger is appropriate. Men have the right to not think about things and to remain numb if they wish. The consequences are upon their own heads. It does not stop the rest of us from pursuing our goals.

We may well like to have their support for our cause and we should encourage them to participate. It is not what we say to them about this but how we say it that really matters. Bullying them into joining us only shows that we are not truly at peace with our own objectives. Bullying is the resort of someone who is trying to wield power rather than encouraging free individuals to join a cause. Aggressive behaviour or ‘bashing’ re-enforces all the negative stereotypes we are trying to dismantle. Men need to be tough and to take one on the chin and not to whimper when another man attacks them. It is men who propagate these attitudes that are at fault. How can we demand respect for men when we do not even show it ourselves? It is not treating men like children to be reasonable and caring towards them – it is treating them like human beings with respect for their choices even if we do not agree with them.

We have to lead men and not push them or frighten them into joining the cause for men’s rights. If two men’s groups exist fighting for the same objectives and one was aggressive and the other was not I know which one I would gravitate towards if I were uncertain and apprehensive about asserting my rights in relation to women. Most men have had a lifetime of being ‘bashed’ by both women and men. If that is the only way we can get the message across then it must be a pretty uninspiring message.

To Micheal T.

Very nicely written, but I fail to see the relevance. Most of the men I know detest what women are doing to them and/or their families. Many are being hurt or damaged to great extremes. They just don’t know what to do about it. Some, even though they hate it, think it is normal because they were born into it. They don’t know it is wrong and should be changed.

Yes, we are a bit pissed off because so many don’t know they are most of the problem, (some believe THE problem) and there can never be any meaning change, which is what most want anyway, unless they act accordingly. If they knew these things and chose to act as they do, it would be different. True some men fit your category, but it is a small minority and we are not trying to force anything on them.

Ignorance and cowardice, to one degree or another, are destroying our culture. I thought we WERE guiding and leading them.

I believe you are going to get pounded on this.

@ Richard

First, I should clarify that I am not a psychologist. I was a licensed counselor for quite some time. I have a B.A. in psychology with two years of additional training in chemical dependency treatment. A psychologist, at least in Texas where I live, must have a Ph.D.

That being said, a lot of time treating alcoholics taught me a few things about alcoholism, and a few things about gender as well.

There are some very glaring differences between alcoholism and destructive masculinity, and I made the comparison somewhat lightly. But on some level both of them do have some similarities. Denial, continuing behaviors despite the onset of life damaging consequences, and in the end, choices.

Some people look at alcoholics much as you alluded to; as out of control people without any ability to alter their behavior. My experience is that nothing could be further from the truth. An alcoholic loses control after they start drinking, but almost all of them have a choice each time they take that first drink on another binge.

A lot of alcoholics are binge drinkers who drink on weekends, or “functional” alcoholics who manage to stay sober for work (again choices). And we can’t forget the numbers of alcoholics that have been through multiple treatment programs, learned as much about their condition as the people treating them and still CHOOSE to drink after they leave treatment.

Like I said, there are some real differences, but the one think that I try to remember to remember is that when treating alcoholism, whether we consider it a choice or not, the method of choice is not to hold hands and pat them on the head, but instead to hold a mirror up to their faces, rather brutally and quite publicly, and present them with what their drinking was doing to them. And even with that, recidivism is really high.

But my experience is that most all the ones I saw who made it out attributed their success in part to facing up to the damages and really desiring something better for themselves. And in finding affiliation with other recovering alcoholics.

And that too I think brings to light some more similarities that we have with that group of people.

I make the alcoholic/masculinity analogy not because either condition is really uncontrollable, but because both involve destructive behavior, defending it, justifying it, rationalizing it, glorifying it, even attacking other to maintain it. It doesn’t strike me as coincidental the similarities of someone who will tell their closest family members to screw off when they confront them about their drinking and men who tell someone to screw off when they confront them about being servile and obsequious to women.

In both cases they get tough and nasty and turn the problem back at the “accuser” but I also know that in both cases, inside themselves, they know it’s 100% true.

Sometimes you can make them think about it with a gentle hand, sometimes with a kick in the teeth, but mostly they will never do it.

Good thing for the MRM that even 2% of a male population shedding their denial and doing something about it would be enough to change everything.

@ Richard

First, I should clarify that I am not a psychologist. I was a licensed counselor for quite some time. I have a B.A. in psychology with two years of additional training in chemical dependency treatment. A psychologist, at least in Texas where I live, must have a Ph.D.

That being said, a lot of time treating alcoholics taught me a few things about alcoholism, and a few things about gender as well.

There are some very glaring differences between alcoholism and destructive masculinity, and I made the comparison somewhat lightly. But on some level both of them do have some similarities. Denial, continuing behaviors despite the onset of life damaging consequences, and in the end, choices.

Some people look at alcoholics much as you alluded to; as out of control people without any ability to alter their behavior. My experience is that nothing could be further from the truth. An alcoholic loses control after they start drinking, but almost all of them have a choice each time they take that first drink on another binge.

A lot of alcoholics are binge drinkers who drink on weekends, or “functional” alcoholics who manage to stay sober for work (again choices). And we can’t forget the numbers of alcoholics that have been through multiple treatment programs, learned as much about their condition as the people treating them and still CHOOSE to drink after they leave treatment.

Like I said, there are some real differences, but the one think that I try to remember to remember is that when treating alcoholism, whether we consider it a choice or not, the method of choice is not to hold hands and pat them on the head, but instead to hold a mirror up to their faces, rather brutally and quite publicly, and present them with what their drinking was doing to them. And even with that, recidivism is really high.

But my experience is that most all the ones I saw who made it out attributed their success in part to facing up to the damages and really desiring something better for themselves. And in finding affiliation with other recovering alcoholics.

And that too I think brings to light some more similarities that we have with that group of people.

I make the alcoholic/masculinity analogy not because either condition is really uncontrollable, but because both involve destructive behavior, defending it, justifying it, rationalizing it, glorifying it, even attacking other to maintain it. It doesn’t strike me as coincidental the similarities of someone who will tell their closest family members to screw off when they confront them about their drinking and men who tell someone to screw off when they confront them about being servile and obsequious to women.

In both cases they get tough and nasty and turn the problem back at the “accuser” but I also know that in both cases, inside themselves, they know it’s 100% true.

Sometimes you can make them think about it with a gentle hand, sometimes with a kick in the teeth, but mostly they will never do it.

Good thing for the MRM that even 2% of a male population shedding their denial and doing something about it would be enough to change everything.

Though

“And that is how most of you live, in a penis dictated servitude; as trained seals fearful of saying or doing anything that might cause princess to get upset with you, or, God forbid, that might keep you from getting laid.”

Then why does the men’s rights movement associate itself with the PUA community, an entire philosophy and way of life built on penis-dictated servitude?

@ Paul

Poor choice of words on my part – I should have said, “background in psychology”, or “more knowledgable than me in psychology”.

And – most likely more experienced in dealing with the “subserviant to women” brand of men.

To be honest, I don’t think I have met a man that cannot use the word “woman” or “women” in a sentence that contains no profanity…

Maybe I am one of those guys that scares those “subserviant” men – so they do not socialize with me…

@ ho hum

I am not at all sure that any “association” is actually there. There are certainly some divergent groups within the MRM, as we are mostly unorganized.

But I don’t see any, for lack of a better word, official relationship with PUA’s. We don’t run PUA pieces here and thought there are some on other men’s rights sites, they aren’t activists or even politically oriented.

As a side note, I agree with you totally. PUA’s obviously center their lives on getting sex. Hardly in line with mainstream MRA thinking as I know it.

Paul,

Could not agree with you more on this subject. I had a long discussion, actually several long discussions with Michael Robinson of Fathers and Families in Sacramento, on this matter last year.

Men basically are 1) cheap bastards and do not know how to join groups for the common good because of the self-reliance machoism they suffer from and 2) men prefer to suffer in silence and it is unmanly to publicly feel pain and show suffering.

I gave up a long time ago trying to recruit men ( like NOW does with women) to join together for our common good. Somehow most men seem to think they can fight the institutionalized evil aligned against them without legal help. Besides most like to think they are roosters. Well, a gang of chickens can beat up a lone rooster, anytime.

You cannot win any legal battle to change laws without either massive effort (see, Civil Rights of the 60s) or without $$$.

Paul Elam, Roger F. Gay: “The majority of women in psychology are of the feminist persuasion”

I have worked in mental health for over 30 years and I fully agree with the above statement. Furthermore, now as an ordained pastor, I also contend that most “clergy” now have a feminist mindset. I did belong to the American Association of Christian Counselors but would not renew my membership as almost all of them took this approach. Anytime they talked about domestic violence, it would have made NOW proud.

I do not know of any faith based resource for abused men other then SM. I have often encouraged men (and some women) to seek counseling in person but I also encourage them to “interview” the counselor because we are in fact hiring them to do a job. If they do not understand and acknowledge the real facts of abuse, find someone else.

“American churches are becoming feminized, and that is turning men off in droves, says the director of the National Coalition of Men’s Ministries. …Men often are criticized in church, but not helped, Erickson said. Pastors point out the inadequacies of fathers, but “these men already realize they are bad fathers,” he said. “Let’s provide training and equipping.” The average church is not relevant to men, and is “answering questions they are not asking.”

This is true for almost every aspect of society!

http://shatterdmen.com/Jezebel%20Within.htm

@ Shatteredmen

Very true. I used to tell men from my groups who were going to seek further counseling to ask the therapist what their knowledge was of “mens issues”

I told them that if they got a puzzled look on their face that it was time to run. And if they said something stupid and men and feelings, run harder.

@MickeyT

I don’t think the original article was directed at the people you describe. Men who do not know what to do about the problem do not need to be bashed into admitting that they have a problem in their relationships with women or the justice system. They are fully aware of their problem. I think the article was directed at men who do not even see that there is a problem or those who see it but choose to do nothing about it. I would say that the majority of men belong to this category. I don’t think you can have effective change until this majority are galvanised into action. The question is how you get them to change. I do not think that attacking them is the answer.

@Mark Goodbey

I think your assessment of men is rather simplistic and dismissive. No human being likes to be treated unjustly. No one likes to suffer. People put up with it nevertheless and the real issue is – why? Many men allow themselves to be treated poorly for complex reasons that have a great deal to do with how they were treated in childhood. Often it is because when they stood up for their rights as children they were beaten into submission by the ‘caring‘ males in their life. They quickly learned that if they were to survive childhood at all then they should suppress their anger and the quest for their rights. That is a logical response for a frightened child to make. These people carry those feelings and attitudes and behaviours into adulthood where it is not a logical response. You cannot change those ingrained behaviours without getting to the root cause of them and this will never be achieved by bashing them, harassing them or telling them to wake up to themselves.

There is some arrogance and some ignorance amongst those in the men’s rights movement who seem to think that because they are fighting for men’s rights that they are in some way superior to those men who are not. Not everyone who is involved in men’s activism is involved for the right reasons. Some are involved to wield power and to bully other men. Some are involved because they have resentment about their relationships with women that have nothing to do with their rights as men.

If we cannot galvanise the uninvolved men into action then it is not our problem. We are only responsible for our own actions. We should do what we can do ourselves and not feel guilty about what we do not have resources to do. If we begin attacking men who refuse to help the cause then it is because we have some agenda other than men’s rights. Some people do change their behaviour when they are bashed but where does their anger go? It usually finds some other outlet. Changing out of fear is never as effective as changing out of love of one’s self.

Paul, your rant built the momentum for the close, and then you failed at the most crucial point: the ask.

You need to NAME the father’s rights groups to whom men should be donating money. If you were a man who had no concept of the father’s rights movement and you figured it would be a sensible thing to invest in your son’s futures with a donation, wouldn’t you balk simply because you have no clue which groups are effective?

Help the guys out a little!

1. Fathers and Families
The leading father’s rights group in the United States. Employs two full-time lobbyists. Extensive contacts throughout the national media and academia. Articulates a clear vision about its goals. Has successfully introduced, passed, and blocked bills in state and national legislatures. Has led successful campaigns combating cultural misandry against men in public television, anti-male advertising, anti-male public service announcements, rash and/or ineffective child support collection policies, and correcting inaccurate and ideological-based claims about female vs. male victimization from domestic violence. The most effective and articulate voice — culturally and politically — for fathers today in the United States.
http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/

2. National Coalition For Men
Uses lawsuits to challenge laws that discriminate against men. Successfully overturned a law in California that denied public funds to male victims of domestic violence. Advocates for men on a broad array of issues, not just fathers.
http://www.ncfm.org/

There are others, including RADAR and Fathers 4 Justice, but the above two are head-and-shoulders above the rest in terms of their effectiveness in the courts, legislatures, academia, and the culture at large.

All good salesmen and solicitors of donations understand that the most crucial point of the dialog is the ask!

@ John Dias

You are quite correct. Thanks for pointing it out. I will add that list to the end of the article so that whoever else reads it will have that option.

Regards,

Paul

@Micheal T.

Whatever, it’s his opinion and that’s what he’s here for. My opinion is, he goes a tad too far in this area, but he’s nowhere near depriving anyone of their rights. It’s almost as if you don’t want him to have THAT opinion because it’s too close to sounding as if it might take away somebody’s rights. I don’t think he’s calling for an act of Congress to require all men to contribute. It’s despicable for any man who truly sees his fellow men, and country which he enjoys and benefits from, in such distress while being capable and unhindered, to stand idly by.

Maybe we do need some “tough love” to transform spectators into players.

Well done, Paul.

I’ve often had the same thoughts myself as many of my efforts had the mental, but not the type of physical support that I’ve been looking for. Men need to get and stay active as they are being left out of more and more of what America used to be. As an older white male, I often feel like the new “minority”. That will not shut me up, however!:)

John Lukas
http://wadvpress.org

Paul, you are saying what older men have said to younger ones for many many generations. My father told me -

Don’t have anything to do with women
If you do don’t marry them
If you do don’t have children
If you do then find yourself a place to run and hide in, because by God you are going to need it.

But evolution has ensured that young men will mate with women, and that women will have babies. It is not practical for men to change their behaviour, it cannot be done. It is the balance of power and the anti-man laws that must be changed; and a male pill so that men can decide if they want the babies and regain the balance of power between the sexes.

@Michael T.
Simplistic and dismissive. Thanks for the compliment!

I’m a little late to this thread and can’t add much to Paul’s discourse on males. As a former stay-at-home dad schooled in the 50′s version of maleness, in that we were the breadwinners et al I know clearly how a traditional man thinks.

Knowing that and then adapting to a new role is challenging, enlightening and doesn’t change our maleness. What it showed for me was the versatility of our masculinity while retaining what makes us men. I raised 2 daughters from infancy for 10 years and adapted well to all of those things one does that are called nurturing while still introducing the girls to some activities that no mother would entertain at a given age because of their risk aversion.

I recall holding my 12 month old in an office while my ex was busy with someone and my child was quite upset. I walked with her, raised slightly above my shoulders, with her head next to mine and patted her on the back around that office for what seemed an eternity and eventually she settled down. Finally she fell asleep and did I feel good. My focus was not on her disrupting behaviour but on her discomfort. That was the nurturing part of me kicking in. I remember it well because I knew on that day I could be as good as any mom – I did have doubts up until then – and I could be even better at this nurturing business. My child had found comfort in my arms in a public place that was challenging because others were being impacted. I was not feminized by this and I frankly don’t think it is a feminine trait they necessarily own.

Many men of my generation just don’t get to develop it as well or as early because we were locked into our socialized gender roles. After this episode I had far more confidence in my ability to comfort my child in a public place when under scrutiny from others. If you are a man and have a child who is crying in a public place the looks on people passing you by will clearly tell you they think you are an incompetent idiot. If, however, you show you have confidence things will be quite different and people will see this.

I say the above to let you know we men are quite versatile if we allow ourselves the time to become involved. We can change hundreds if not more diapers, prepare and feed them no matter their age, take them to activities so they learn to swim, skate, (mandatory in Canada or suffer the consequences), to gymnastics, go down steep hills on toboggans several times a week, spend lots of time at municipal parks, show them how to skip stones and feed ducks, teach them about the trees in their yards, and the list goes on.

Men of the current generation are much more involved and my son-in-law is a classic example of a very involved and nurturing dad.

Telling those who are outside our sphere of experience and knowledge is the right thing to do but it doesn’t always resonate immediately because of the massive feminization of our society. Persistence, patience, and taking advantage of opportunities is important. We are making dents in that social order and calling the militant radfems and their sycophants to account as these opportunities arise.

The traditional approach many male sycophants take is to declare themselves feminists. In other words they are ashamed of their masculinity and feel it necessary to jump out of their skin to show they believe in equality. It isn’t necessary to disavow what we are to believe both genders are equal – and different. I like asking these male feminists why they need a female characteristic to show they believe in equality. It sometimes creates a little dissonance as they try to answer.

I see more men getting over their fears and making comments on newspaper blogs. I see more people saying – I didn’t know that – when presented with facts they can peruse at their leisure.

We need to keep doing it in a reasoned manner. A good rant every now and then gets it out of our system and Paul’s is a classic example of a very good discussion on we males and our proclivities. We can be much more than the stereotypes presented by our media through the filter of feminism – and still be men. I know this from a decade of personal experience at day after day of full time immersion in parenting, and being good at it.

Paul, good list of the things and descriptions that men do wrong.
I’d like to add that many men who oppose, or even suffer from this cancer, through ignorance, actually support it in the very way it was born and metastasized. It’s amazing how many men’s rights advocates vote Democrat. By doing that they are supporting feminist “mischief” from the White House, Joe (VAWA) Biden, Clinton, Boxer, Fienstien on down. Dems consistantly vote in favor of feminist bills etc.. Feminists donate an enormous amount of money to the party every year and always vote in favor of Dem legislation. And of course, it’s quid pro quo from the candidates and office holders which brings us more anti male/pro female legislation. As of today, it continues to progress their way.

So of course, many men not only enable or let Fems do their dirty work, they help them politically, which is the way this whole thing came about, and the only way it will ever reverse. I’m not saying all Dems are feminists, but I am saying the party basically supports the feminist ideology. They are the reason we are here in this discussion today.
Men need to do some of their own research on this because our media, mostly controlled by feminists, Democrats etc., hides almost all information which may show them in an unfavorable way. The public is inundated with feminist propaganda, and has been for the last forty years or so. The Eagle Forum, Fathers and Families, mentioned previously, might be a good place to start research which is uninfluenced by feminism.

True, there are many profund observations and anylasis etc. here, and if enough men join in and accept that they must do something about this horrible situation, it may change their behavior to benefit us. But men will never be truly liberated from bondage and attain humaness until these cruel an unfair laws are changed or removed from the books. That must be our ultimate goal.

We might see some success in changing this situation in a meaningful way sooner by focusing more our attention on political change, rather nature change.

I agree there is a lot of work to be done in orderto raise men’s societal position, but first we must stop the destruction our children and ourselves.

@ Mike Murphy

Thank you for the most excellent post. I don’t have anything I can add to it except to say that it amazes me that men have ever been as stereotyped as they have been.

Regards,

Paul

@ Mickey

Great post as always. There is much I could say but for now I am going to take the easy way out and paste a comment I recently made at Antimisandry.com regarding the left/right rift as it pertains to the MRM.

The problem for me resides in the definition of politics itself, which is “social relations involving intrigue to gain authority or power”

Both liberalism and conservatism are political orientations, and their job is to acquire authority and power. And in the area of social relations involving intrigue to gain those things, nothing is more of a stacked deck than the power of women over men.

So as long as we seek a political orientation for the MRM, at least in the mainstream which has to appeal to the masses, we end up losers. No amount of spin will ever change that because the fundamental and innate predisposition in the mass of humanity is for men to sacrifice for the improvement of women. The male code of protect and provide and the female code of being the assumed recipient of that protection and provision remains in full force no matter what feminists or masculists have accomplished so far.

We can and should seek legal changes, because, at least in principal, and often in fact, the law is gender neutral. We all know that it has been corrupted with gender politics, but as we have seen in California and West Virgina, legal remedies can be pursued and accomplished.

That leaves us standing to gain a lot from the lessons of the feminists.

All politics are personal.

The downside to that is of course the downside to politics. The masses of men are not going to take this to the personal level with women.

BUT

This approach does lend itself to the idea that any man can obtain a great deal of liberation and all he has to do is choose it. Don’t marry. Don’t have children. Don’t rescue women. Don’t let them in the lifeboat first. Don’t pay their way through anything for any reason at any time. Don’t take their abuse. Dump them the minute they play princess. Don’t tolerate a child in a woman’s body.

Just say NO.

And their is a growing trend toward this. PUA’s, MGTOW and MRA’s are all figuring out that if you are sick and tired of the princess you need to kill the prince. There are men in the movement that can teach this to their sons. I know I am passing it along to my grandsons. And yes, I will be telling them that women are fun, but to be regarded on the interpersonal level always as Teddy Bears with hidden, retractable claws, and that there are no exceptions.

And before the “not all women” police come knocking on the door, that statement is about odds of probability, not a declaration to the nature of all women.

None.

And before the “not all women” police come knocking on the door, that statement is about odds of probability, not a declaration to the nature of all women.

It is the only way of giving my grandsons the best chance of staying safe.

When and if the time ever comes that women can no longer use men as pack animals, and the only way to bring men back to doing anything more with them than a pump-n-dump, there will be a change of attitude across the culture that will open doors for some real progress. Even political.

In the meantime, at least in my opinion, any effort spent trying to drive the MRM into any point in the political spectrum is just a waste of time.

@ Paul

Good post, Paul

The “hidden” or “retracted” postition of the “claws” you speak of, is only a man’s perception, which, in a sense, is the essence of our woes. To me they have been in plain sight since I reached puberty. They just needed to be maintained properly and generally kept under control to prevent injury to others and self.

Our work is cut out for us. I suppose a gala exposition at a new worlds fair still wouldn’t be enough for some of these guys. Especially those who have a preferential perception.

Of course there would be little success in winning if we didn’t have what they want. But GOOD GOD, man, let’s not vote for the opposition in the mean time.

@ Mickey

I hear you amigo and understand. But I am sticking to my guns. They are BOTH the opposition. My vote goes to the true constitutional conservative on the ballot, which won’t be from the dems or pubs. If I have to write in Ron Paul again I will.

Cheers

@ Paul

I didn’t mean you, Paul. I probably should have worded that differently.

I agree, sometimes a third party candidate has better ideas. Not that I have ever let it affect my vote, but, unfortunately we all know what usually happens to that third party vote. It’s not a good situation, especially in times like this.

When it comes to enemies, I address the one who has nukes first.

As a woman, I’m disappointed and disgusted with the hyper feminist agenda. I’m tired of male bashing shows, and discriminatory laws. Women have elevated themselves at the expense of men. That is not equality.