Those of you who follow this blog may have already read about MRAs (Men’s Rights Activists) who outwardly argue that feminism is out to destroy men and irrevocably hurt masculinity (blah blah blah). It’s actually far more about preserving dominance over women. MRAs and MGTOWs want to maintain the status quo.
Case in point, a site I stumbled upon complaining about misandry (the opposite of misogyny). Given the author’s attacks on ‘lefties’, I can only conclude they are of the reactionary right.
The first paragraph:
In response to “overwhelming levels of misogynistic abuse” from metrosexual, soft Beta herblings, misogyny will now be classified a hate crime in the decadent, declining, and increasingly deranged Anglo nation of England. Whistle or cat call at a woman in Nottinghamshire and you could end up in prison, convicted of a hate crime. That’s only one way an unsuspecting man could end up with a hate crime on his record. Police in Nottinghamshire released this statement about their new “protect the puss, exploit the dick” tactics.
The thing is, women don’t like being catcalled and don’t invite it. I am not aware of any woman anywhere who would regard attention like that as being a good thing. It’s a shame we are not better at policing ourselves fellas – if we behaved like gentlemen, and didn’t harass women who are simply trying to walk to work or get from to A to B, we might not have created this scenario for ourselves.
Misogynistic hate crime can cause significant distress to women, who have been known to face threats, and in some cases, sexual or physical abuse for turning down propositions.
What about when men face threats? If the sexes are equal as leftists claim, they face equal threats. Nottinghamshire police failed to comment on whether they would be pursuing laws against misandry. Beyond protecting women from turning down advances by gelded Western men, calling a woman a slut or a whore (even if she earns the name going by the textbook definition of the word) will also be classified as a hate crime. According to The Fawcett Society, a female supremacist group, women have suffered the following hate crimes at the hands of horrible men:
What about men? A classic question asked by men who are worried their place in society will be weakened by equality. Are we subjected to anything remotely like the harassment and abuse women face? No, of course not. Guys, how many times have you been groped or whistled at? When was the last time a woman threatened you because you wouldn’t give them your phone number, or have a drink with them, or offer them sex just because they gave you attention? I can count on my fingers how many times any of that has happened to me – zero.
Men and women should be equal, but we’re not treated that way. Women are more likely to face sexual harassment and abuse than we are.
Notice also the jab about behaviour. If sleeping around defines a woman as a ‘slut’, does it not also apply to us? Why is it better for men to sleep around than women? It’s a social construct, designed to let us do what we please whilst controlling women.
The author mentioned the Fawcett Society, and calls them a supremacist group. Take a look at them and decide for yourself – I think the author reveals much about their thinking that they could dismiss a charity as a supremacist group.
Women found that 85% of women aged 18-24 had experienced unwanted sexual attention and 45% had experienced sexual touching. Online there is a similar story. Research by Demos into misogynistic abuse online found that 6,500 women were targeted by 10,000 aggressive and misogynistic tweets using the words “slut” or “whore” in a three-week period in the UK. The Fawcett Society says women and girls face a “tidal wave of abuse and harassment” every day.
Fudged statistics and invented crises aside, Nottinghamshire Chief Constable Sue Fisher one again plays the tired old victim card. Fisher told interviewers:
What women face, often on a daily basis, is absolutely unacceptable and can be extremely distressing. It’s a very important aspect of the overall hate crime work being conducted and one that will make Nottinghamshire a safer place for all women. Nottinghamshire Police is committed to taking misogynistic hate crime seriously and encourages anyone who is affected by it to contact us without hesitation.
In addition to cat-calling and name calling, Fisher will be “acting without hesitation” against men who commit such unthinkable offenses as sending an unwanted or even uninvited (WTF?) text message – also included in the Draconian guidelines. The Western march against and marginalization of heterosexuality continues, part of an agenda of creating a totally sexless society.
The author dismisses the facts out of hand. The fact is, women are more likely to be the victim of sexual assault and harassment. This is not something invented out of thin air. Go out there and ask women and men, and come back to me with what you learn.
As for their next paragraph, I refer back to my earlier point about policing ourselves. Is the article’s author really as ignorant as to think that unsolicited texts are usually innocent in nature?
Halfway through, the article switches gears.
Interestingly, England continues to push severe laws on Western men while inviting Sharia Law adherents into the country under the guise of diversity. No word from feminists on what the effects of such Sharia Law will have on women, but since Islam is one of the “protected classes” it is not held to the same standards as the Evil White Male. Here are some things “diversity” will bring to England once Sharia Law is instituted:
- Men are entitled to up to 4 wives, but women can only have one husband.
- Sexual submission is unconditional once a woman married a man.
- Temporary marriage (even for a half hour) is allowed by some Islamic scholars, i.e. prostitution.
- Wife beating is permitted by some Islamic scholars.
- Men own all the property in the marriage, except what women owned before the marriage. (Misandrist Western nations could actually learn from this one!)
The acceptance of Sharia Law at the same time England is punishing everything from whistling to text messages displays typical leftist hypocrisy we have become so accustomed to in modern times. In short, the laws against “overwhelming levels of misogynistic abuse” are aimed at a certain group of people.
Scare-mongering 101. In addition to linking to an article they themselves wrote as ‘proof’ of feminism’s assault upon men, the author now tries to link this to Sharia Law, which is apparently inevitable across the UK. The self-referential nature of this individual is remarkable, and he offers no evidence to back up this assertion. Classic, reactionary right mentality.
Everyone is Protected Except Straight, White, Christian Males
The new legislation follows a trend in the West of protecting every class of people except one, which in and of itself is a form of discrimination against straight, white, Christian males who can only be offenders and not victims under such laws. Specifically, the following five characteristics are “protected” by law.
- Race (any race except Caucasian)
- Religion (any religion except Christianity)
- Sexual Orientation (any orientation other than heterosexual)
- Gender Identity (any made-up gender other than biological male or female)
As is normally the case with leftist politics, women are eternal victims even though divorce laws favor them, reproductive laws give fathers no say in the life and death of their own children (i.e. abortion), men are forced out of jobs by affirmative action laws that benefit women, and bloated governments in Western nations have extensive lists of programs that exclusively benefit women and none that exclusively benefit men. Not to mentio America’s stereotypical and sexist portrayal of men by the media, as detailed in an article titled 20 Examples What It Would Look Like if White Privilege Really Existed by Townhall:
The vast majority of occasions where discrimination takes place is where the majority (which in the UK and US would happen to be white people, who might identify as Christians more than they wouldn’t) discriminate against the minority. The suggestion that as a white male the author is somehow now part of an under-priveliged group is absurd. You need only to turn on the news to read of the institutionalised racism against black people in the US. You need only see listen to the rhetoric of the Republican party to see why the LGBT community still needs protecting from bigots. You need only do the slightest bit of research to see that women are far more likely to be the victims of a pay gap, not to mention sexual violence. All this article does so far is to provide a long-winded attempt to justify sexism, racism and bigotry.
Don’t expect the bumbling white dad or backwards, racist idiot Southerner stereotype (a form of discrimination and dehumanization of people from the South) to disappear from the idiot box or the narratives of Marxist marionettes anytime soon.
And yet it’s usually white men who are portrayed in positions of importance on TV and in films. It’s usually a white male president or prime minister, it’s a white guy who saves them in a crisis, it’s a white guy whose the boss in a workplace, and so on and so forth.
So, this is where we are at after 50 years of Western female empowerment and male disenfranchisement. It’s okay to hate, make fun of, debase, and marginalize men, but it’s a one-way street to oblivion. Nobody else is being forced down the same path. The straight, white, heterosexual, Chistian male must prostrate himself and smile as he is persecuted for the supposed crimes against humanity of his ancestors. An eternal punching bag, he is a criminal for existing and having a difference of opinion today.
What’s the end goal of this soft form of ethnic cleansing, scapegoating and the figurative neutering of men? It doesn’t look like its proponents will stop until one group of people have been completely obliterated. If ever there was a time for men to give the finger to a system that hates them, and become Men Going Their Own Way, it’s now.
I refer back to scare-mongering 101. I can only imagine the author takes the vast majority of their ‘information’ about feminism from the most extreme radical feminist sites, and hasn’t actually tried to understand either feminism in general or the world around him.