Misogyny, Misandry and the Reactionary Right

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)
  • Disability

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.


20 thoughts on “Misogyny, Misandry and the Reactionary Right

      1. I couldn’t agree more! It’s like they want to fight against a better society. I guess they’re not used to so many people speaking out at once. It’s not just one group. It’s not just white women, it’s most women, of all colours and religions. Then there’s the black lives matter movement, which addresses the notion that racism isn’t “dead” in the States, like so many prefer to believe (I’m just using the States as an example, as that’s obviously where a lot of shootings have occurred and whilst I know the movement has spread to the UK and Australia, it’s biggest there). More and more people are wanting equality and equity, and I guess those that are in privileged positions don’t want to lose that. I guess they see it as an attack on them, instead of evening the status quo. But seriously great post. I cannot get over how good this was to read. Part of me wants to ask where you find these people; part of me thinks my wrath will hit an all-time high and perhaps it’s best for everyone if I avoid it. Did you see the #blokesadvice stuff? That was outed? (It’s a secret FB page.) It’s despicable.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. I saw a little of that Blokes Advice page (I actually posted there, but I don’t know if what I said even got published), but it’s the sort of page I can’t look at for very long.

        As for where I find these people… Well, I can share if you really Want!

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Maybe! I don’t know!! Part of me is curious … part of me feels like it’ll serve no further purpose than making me angry!

        Liked by 2 people

  1. Again, I’m impressed by your grace & eloquence in response to a situation that would leave me smashing my head against the keyboard in way of a rebuttal. The fact that he can, apparently, read the same article describing the law that I did & not see that the harassment – not merely “chatting a woman up” as he assumed – fits the description of a hate crime (meaning, according to the article, a crime committed on a victim based solely on a part of his/her identity that he/she can’t change), is just gob-smacking.

    Brilliant post. Really, I can’t even form thoughts now having read his idiotic opinions.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I think you did a fantastic job. Keep up the great work – but, as always, make sure you take time to care for your self; the constant barrage of hate & ignorance can be draining.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Despite you doing your best to deride those hardworking men and women who care for men’s rights, I kept reading. Until I got to this bit, at which point I gave up the bigotry:
    > 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.

    I have often been with beautiful or elegant women who have had uninvited compliments (that’s “wolf-whistles” and “catcalls” to your way of thinking) and not one of them was anything other than pleased at the compliment.

    Any woman (who has not been indoctrinated by feminist studies that tell her it is an insult) is likely to be pleased by a compliment, even if it is delivered in a slightly crass or offhand manner. Which reminds me of one woman who did not like it: she was a feminist; perhaps that was the problem.


    1. Firstly, thank you for your post. I appreciate that stepping outside of a comfort zone is not always easy.

      It will probably not surprise you to learn that I don’t agree with you. I don’t link compliments to wolf-whistles. I don’t link compliments to being shouted at from passing cars. Most women don’t appreciate these gestures (just google ‘no women ever’ and be sure to check out the hashtag on Twitter). Such behaviour on the part of the men who do it is indeed crass, and it is also presumptive.


    2. I know many women who don’t identify as feminist, don’t read or even agree with feminist writings, & who disagree with a lot of feminist ideology — they still feel scared & off-put when cat-called. I cant think of a single woman who would hear “Hey beautiful, I wanna put my c**k in your a**” (or, as you put it, a “slightly crass compliment”) & find it complimentary.

      I don’t deny that you may have had some women feel complimented by “wolf whistles” or “cat calls” in your presence…. or that they didn’t tell you that it made them feel anything other than complimented. I don’t think that a person can use a few instances of less aggressive cat-calling to determine how the majority of female-bodied people feel, especially when the proof to the opposite seems rather abundant.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Out of curiosity, did these women SAY they were flattered, or did they just blush and/or stammer and look away? I had someone “pay me compliments” because he liked to see me blush and stammer. He thought I was playing coy and enjoyed his attention, and he ACTUALLY TOLD ME he liked to see me blush. Well, I WASN’T enjoying the attention. I was embarrassed and nervous and trying to figure out how to get the hell away from the awkward situation–and him. The guy was 8 inches taller, outweighed me by at least 60 pounds, and I worked with him occasionally. I had to transfer when he was getting too forward and wouldn’t back off, and I didn’t think HR would be in my corner (after all, he was just “paying me compliments” as some other co-workers suggested).
        He got fired recently when his “paying me compliments” branched off into online-stalking with company resources and they found out, because, you know, digging up tagged-photos of a woman you’re interested in going back to High School and trying to track down her friends to find out everything about the woman is a REAL compliment and she should be flattered. I didn’t post those pictures–some friends did–but in our over-sharing digital age, it’s ridiculously easy to stalk someone (and they not even know it until way later).
        But he’s not the only one. I’m socially awkward, and just about every man I met who was flirting with me interpreted my nervous blushing and babbling as feigned disinterest and kept trying. I EVEN TOLD a few of them I was uncomfortable (when I found my voice), and they looked at me blankly, then went back to trying to make me blush. Did they think I’d just “get used to” their attention and cave? I can only guess that yes, they thought so.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I’m really sorry that happened to you. I’m even more sorry that I know your story isn’t rare or unique. Too often, the “‘No’ means ‘yes'” messages men get from society (especially movies) encourages them to keep pressing until they get the response they want… or a restraining order (which, too often, means nothing 😥 ).


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s