A Rant
In previous discussions on the topic of male reproductive rights, or to be more accurate, the complete absence of male rights in a climate of male financial responsibility for the exercised reproductive rights of women, that responsibility enforced by courts and police : the word , the appropriate word to describe men legally bound to finance somebody else's unilateral decision to reproduce is slavery.
That is the correct word. However, we generally avoid using it because for most people, when they hear it, all higher cognitive function exits through the nearest window.
You’re being ridiculous, you’re exaggerating, slavery doesn’t exist anymore, and my very favourite, any variation of the claim that we live in a patriarchy.
It this point in the discussion, when dealing with an MRA – or a realist, that is, a person who is both untainted with, and who values reality, consideration of the higher death rates of males, higher rates of criminal victimization, male targeting violence, male targeting hate in our media, education system and so on along with lots of other inconvenient empirical data might indicate a rational consideration of modern slavery in the context of unbalanced and one-sided legal duties and rights. Of course, that's not how it goes in the real world, there's deflection to other topics, accusation of misogyny, accusation of failure to be a real man and all manner of other dodging and distraction. But the fact remains that men have no reproductive rights, while being legally required to pay for the exercised reproductive rights of women. And this is slavery. Her body her choice falls apart when the platitude is stated in its complete form. Her body, her choice, his wallet, career, freedom, and children, also her choice.
I'll say it again, slavery, and it's an ugly word.
On what will seem at first to be another topic, in the last decade, we've witnessed the erasure of a substantial fraction of the legally protected civil rights itemized in the united states constitution. Specifically in the bill of rights.
First ammendment, freedom of speech - some will say its gone already. Ill say its nearly gone.
The stop online piracy act isn't really about piracy, its about shutting down, or controlling free expression on the most successful technological expression of free speech ever. The internet. You know the thing that makes this show possible, as well as avoiceformen.com – and your blog if you have one.
The right to keep and bear arms : enjoyed in most states, but in a culture of digital banking and digital identification, of increasingly little relevance in protecting the public against a government which recognizes no limit on its power.
No requirement to quarter soldiers : until last year, i would have said this was obsolete, now that NDAA has passed, I expect this to come under threat too.
The right to privacy, and potection from unjust search and seizure. The supreme court recently rules that putting a GPS tracking device on a car required a warrant, however, ill also mention full body scanners used by the TSA, pat downs, and the ongoing use of illigitemate wire-tapping against us citizens.
sixth amendment : The rights to a speedy trial. Nope, you can be detained indefinitely without trial.
The right to trial by jury. Except when the accusation is made by a woman over some matter of sexual impropriety. Then you can be tried and convicted by the employees and the students of a college or university, in an ideological court of kangaroos.
The protection of the 8th amendment against excessive bail or cruel punishment. But i guess torture isn't a punishment if it's done before a conviction is obtained.
And the 10th amendment which states quite clearly that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Also, corporations, which due to the limitation of liability through incorporation are not accountable, although they enjoy the legal powers, rights and privileges of personhood.
Combine this with the fact that the democratic system of representative government is now expressed in trans-national corporations using elected representatives of the people as salesmen and facilitators to the profits of corporations and banks with exactly zero regard for direct or indirect damage done to people or communities in pursuit of that profit.
And remember always that the increasingly grotesque, blatant human rights violations pursued by gender feminists not only serve the agendas of banking elites, they're pursued through the same gang of bought and paid for politicians.
This requires no connecting of dots from shady speculation. Obama's attorney general published fraudulent stats to benefit corrupt domestic violence profiteers at the expense of further demonizing and marginalizing men.
Obama also authorized the transfer of trillions of dollars of the bad debts of bankers onto the public – and sold this great rip off by pretending it was to protect the public from those bankers bad decisions.
In case anybody wonders, Obama is just the latest salesman, Bush was the same, Clinton was the same before him, and so on.
Gender feminism is, by the way, not a grass roots social movement, it was funded and propelled in the 1960's and 70's by money from the Rockefeller. Gloria Steinem was dating henry Kissinger when she started ms magazine in 1969. This is not a conspiracy requiring tin foil headgear to follow, its right out in the open. The Rockefeller financing was told to documentary film producer Aaron Russo. One of the freely admitted purposes of feminism was the destruction of the family unit. You know, the building block of human societies for the last few hundred thousand years.
The feminist Linda Gordon said:
"The nuclear family must be destroyed... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process."
Robin Morgan said:
"We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage."
Throughout human history, men have been the protectors their families, and of society. However, now that they're increasingly except from participation in the privilege of having human rights, we see governments acting on behalf of corporations and bankers, and rapidly rendering legally protected humans rights for everyone a void relic of history. And the same elected officials are enacting the policies of 50 years of radical feminist pressure and lobbying, and acting on behalf of their corporate onwre, rather than the electorate which consists of actual human beings.
How stupid do we have to be, how willfully blind to fail to grasp what is going on.
The funny thing being, that if anyone uses that ugly, obsolete word, slavery, emotional driven, intellectually inattentive intellectuals will denounce the idea – condemn the speaker with accusation of trogloditic male privilege and fail totally to understand what is right in front of their eyes.
Oh look, jersey shore is on, pass the cheese covered wacky fries.
Slavery, they will say is a relic of history. One, which in it's recent american manifestation is currently being erased from the history books by elements of the american tea party.
The funny thing about slavery, is that when considered by any modern thinker ( using that word loosely), it's conceived of as something accomplished by brute force, with manacles, whips and chains and direct violence like beatings.
Whether we're talking about ancient rome, or more recent American history, slaved are best gaurded by other slaves. Free human beings dont keep other free human beings in violent bondage.
In a society using slaves, it is the slaves who wield the weapons. This is because using weapons is dangerous, it gets you killed and maimed to a much greater degree than deciding on the actions of other people from an oak panelled office.
It is prisoners are held in bondage with manacles and jail cells. Slaves on the other hand are manacled by control of their minds.
For example, controlling their minds by convincing them that despite higher male death rates, higher rates of criminal victimization, lower life expectancy, despite female favouring affirmative action in higher education – that what we live in is a patriarchy.
If you control their minds, then keeping them in manacles just slow them down when you need your slaves to silence anyone who speaks up in complaint.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Monday, January 23, 2012
Where did all the good men go? [A Rant]
One of the more commonly repeated opinion pieces rearing its ugly visage in the various public open sewers which constitute our mainstream media is the headline “where have all the good men gone”.
This is a stunningly stupid question, asked repeatedly in endless variations.
What happened to all the good men is the women asking that inane question. Women go through their lives surrounded by men they cant see, because these men by being kind, polite, helpful, friendly and non frightening and consequently don't trigger feminine instinctive attraction to assholes, psychopaths, criminals, and various unreconstructed cavemen. Asking why cant you find a decent guy while the decent guy is standing right next to you, or carrying your groceries, well, shit, do you need me to draw you a picture?
A more interesting answer to the question of where have all the good men gone is another question.
Just exactly how do we define good in this equation?
What is it that women want?
It's a long list: but my admittedly incomplete understanding is that what women want is a creature of approximate man shape, broad shoulders, tall, well dressed, with a nice car, a high figure salary, good teeth and cool hair, and all the alpha characteristics to make him a conquerer and leader of men. Except he also needs to bow and scrape and be the selfless self sacrificing lapdog to his woman, except when he's supposed to be dominant, but not too dominant, and also read her mind, but only when hes supposed to, but remain confused and in need of feminine guidance at other times. And a great big cock.
I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
It should be fairly obvious that trying to conform to this list would be both exhausting and futile. Even switching around the criteria I've provided as examples, for other stupider criteria, some variation of a list like this is constantly implied in women's magazines, daytime talk shows, soap operas, romantic comedies, self help books, and everywhere else flattering women can earn somebody a buck.
This isn't even the problem. The problem, ladies, yes, you ladies asking where the all the good men went, the problem, or at least an important part of it is the combination of our society's increasing marginalization and criminalization of male identity, and your ongoing silence. Well, silence isn't quite right, women are now, and have been continuously vocal for the last half century, loudly and repeatedly making it abundantly clear that as men, we're worthless, we're rapists, we're your oppressors, we're violent, we're un-feeling – ill tell you that one hurts, lets see, what else, that we're a bunch of retrograde, infantile, stupid, inferior, lesser humans. We, as stupid inferior men also notice that the inherent internal inconsistency in this public narrative does nothing to diminish the force and volume of the message.
Strangely, from the vast majority of the demographic comprising 65% of the electorate and spending 65% of disposable income world wide – not much besides accusation, and to state it plainly, hatred.
One thing its important to understand, is that even accepting that men as a demographic are indeed stupid enough to throw rocks at – the accusatory and increasingly violent public narrative is penetrating past the thick skulls of men, and registering on the fragments of brain not already devoted to sports, porn, and cheese covered wacky fries.
Did I mention violence? Thats another thing, our society, it seems has decided in its collective mind that violence perpetrated against men is not only totally acceptable, when the person performing that violence is female, well our society, as reflected in the courts as well as our entertainment media thinks it's downright funny.
Kicking a man in the balls is a staple of visual comedy. Kicking a woman in the crotch? Nope, thats just assault. How about sexual dismemberment – you know, drug a man, tie him up, wait for him to wake up, and then cut his dick off with a knife and destroy the severed organ in a garbage disposal.
Day time TV with female hosts and a female audience thinks mutilation is funny. As long as the victim is male, of course.
Men, in their stupidity, their failure to grow up, unwillingness to commit to a relationship, and their increasing refusal to settle down like a good little disposable provider and utility are clearly to blame, and surely it has nothing to do with our culture's and women within our culture's increasing toxicity , hatred, and legally and socially accepted violence towards men.
Yes, men are at fault, where have all the good men gone?
They're right where they've always been. It's just that increasing numbers of them are waking up to the reality that they aren't teated by convention or by law as human beings, and as a consequence they don't want to talk to you.
Most don't even care to explain why.
This is a stunningly stupid question, asked repeatedly in endless variations.
- Huffpo : Why is the marriage rate so low?
- http://www.thefrisky.com/2009-09-23/mind-of-man-where-all-the-good-guys-are/
- http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704409004576146321725889448.html
What happened to all the good men is the women asking that inane question. Women go through their lives surrounded by men they cant see, because these men by being kind, polite, helpful, friendly and non frightening and consequently don't trigger feminine instinctive attraction to assholes, psychopaths, criminals, and various unreconstructed cavemen. Asking why cant you find a decent guy while the decent guy is standing right next to you, or carrying your groceries, well, shit, do you need me to draw you a picture?
A more interesting answer to the question of where have all the good men gone is another question.
Just exactly how do we define good in this equation?
What is it that women want?
It's a long list: but my admittedly incomplete understanding is that what women want is a creature of approximate man shape, broad shoulders, tall, well dressed, with a nice car, a high figure salary, good teeth and cool hair, and all the alpha characteristics to make him a conquerer and leader of men. Except he also needs to bow and scrape and be the selfless self sacrificing lapdog to his woman, except when he's supposed to be dominant, but not too dominant, and also read her mind, but only when hes supposed to, but remain confused and in need of feminine guidance at other times. And a great big cock.
I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
It should be fairly obvious that trying to conform to this list would be both exhausting and futile. Even switching around the criteria I've provided as examples, for other stupider criteria, some variation of a list like this is constantly implied in women's magazines, daytime talk shows, soap operas, romantic comedies, self help books, and everywhere else flattering women can earn somebody a buck.
This isn't even the problem. The problem, ladies, yes, you ladies asking where the all the good men went, the problem, or at least an important part of it is the combination of our society's increasing marginalization and criminalization of male identity, and your ongoing silence. Well, silence isn't quite right, women are now, and have been continuously vocal for the last half century, loudly and repeatedly making it abundantly clear that as men, we're worthless, we're rapists, we're your oppressors, we're violent, we're un-feeling – ill tell you that one hurts, lets see, what else, that we're a bunch of retrograde, infantile, stupid, inferior, lesser humans. We, as stupid inferior men also notice that the inherent internal inconsistency in this public narrative does nothing to diminish the force and volume of the message.
Strangely, from the vast majority of the demographic comprising 65% of the electorate and spending 65% of disposable income world wide – not much besides accusation, and to state it plainly, hatred.
One thing its important to understand, is that even accepting that men as a demographic are indeed stupid enough to throw rocks at – the accusatory and increasingly violent public narrative is penetrating past the thick skulls of men, and registering on the fragments of brain not already devoted to sports, porn, and cheese covered wacky fries.
Did I mention violence? Thats another thing, our society, it seems has decided in its collective mind that violence perpetrated against men is not only totally acceptable, when the person performing that violence is female, well our society, as reflected in the courts as well as our entertainment media thinks it's downright funny.
Kicking a man in the balls is a staple of visual comedy. Kicking a woman in the crotch? Nope, thats just assault. How about sexual dismemberment – you know, drug a man, tie him up, wait for him to wake up, and then cut his dick off with a knife and destroy the severed organ in a garbage disposal.
Day time TV with female hosts and a female audience thinks mutilation is funny. As long as the victim is male, of course.
Men, in their stupidity, their failure to grow up, unwillingness to commit to a relationship, and their increasing refusal to settle down like a good little disposable provider and utility are clearly to blame, and surely it has nothing to do with our culture's and women within our culture's increasing toxicity , hatred, and legally and socially accepted violence towards men.
Yes, men are at fault, where have all the good men gone?
They're right where they've always been. It's just that increasing numbers of them are waking up to the reality that they aren't teated by convention or by law as human beings, and as a consequence they don't want to talk to you.
Most don't even care to explain why.
A Bit More Substance
Speaking volumes through silence
Class hatred and violence in public policy
All human sexuality is EVIL !!!!!!! ( okay, maybe not, how about just male sexuality?)
The political use of feminist astroturf
- Part 1 of 2 A Resounding Silence
- Part 2 of 2 Silence of the man
- The Organized Silencing of a Man Publicly Burned to Death
Class hatred and violence in public policy
- Projection and violence by proxy
- An acceptable doctrine of violence
- Eve Ensler prefers good rape
- Cultivating violence through rhetoric
All human sexuality is EVIL !!!!!!! ( okay, maybe not, how about just male sexuality?)
The political use of feminist astroturf
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Owned by my possessions
For the last 25 years – which is as long as I've been an adult, I've had a box of photos, ancient coins, meteor fragments, foreign bank notes, lenses from optical instruments and other bits and pieces collected over the course of my life. Included in this are a number of items of antique jewelry of variously forgotten provenance.
This box of stuff is, to me, interesting, which is why I've kept most of it for my whole adult life. But I'm not a collector of things, and it's not like any of it has major sentimental attachment. In fact, I believe in the philosophical idea that objects own the people who posses them, and not the other way around. Your possessions require you to house and service them, they become anchors with no benefit.
I am not yet so enlightened that I can simply discard items like antique jewelry in the garbage without feeling like I'm committing vandalism, but I did decide this week to be rid of some of my lifetime's accumulated flotsam.
So earlier this week, I decided to sell some items on E-bay, starting with what I thought would sell easily. An antique brooch carved from tortoise shell into the shape of a sea horse.
I created an E-bay account, linked it to my pay-pal account, took photos of the brooch, wrote up a description and went through the steps of listing it on the auction site. I also looked up antique tortoise shell jewellery and found items similar to mine ranging in price from 20 dollars to several hundred. I put 10 bucks for the price, because I wanted it gone more than I wanted a fist-full of dollars.
E-bay deleted my listing within an hour, because tortoise shell is a controlled substance. Because the tortoises it's made from are endangered, or protected, existing material items made from it are illegal to sell, or to transport across national boundaries, or something like that. My listing on E-Bay violated their terms of service at any rate, and in the deletion notice I got in my email was a warning not to re-list it as fake tortoise shell.
So I'm left with this small item of art I can't sell – which I'm unwilling to dispose of because of my aversion to vandalism. I also can't give it to anybody I know because of the social signal that a gift of jewelry encompasses. I suppose if I knew any cross-dressers or transvestites, this wouldn’t be any problem.
It's in the garbage now, perhaps a hobo will find it.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Exposing a Hate Movement
Anybody who follows A Voice For Men will probably remember the outing on that site of Pamela O'Shaughnessy. She's the Simon and Schuster published author who, as her online persona Vliet Tiptree, spent 4000 words at radical-hub, a feminist collective blog; building a case for a Mengellian "final resolution" using eugenics and selective infanticide to cull males from the planet.
Since Shaughnessy's exposure, she changed the name she blogs under, from Vliet Tiptree to Karma. However, also since then, several Men's Rights Acivists have infiltrated the private radical feminist blog as members - and these individuals have screen-captured and collected hundreds of pages of the conversations of O'Shaughnessy along with dozens of like-minded ideologues, including frank admissions of murderous intent, of intense gender based hatred, and a conscious will to harm or murder children. This last coming from members of the radfem-hub whose day jobs are actually the care of children. The first of a series of articles exposing a violent hate movement run by established, middle class women in academia and government will change the way you look at humanity.
Underbelly of a Hate Movement
Since Shaughnessy's exposure, she changed the name she blogs under, from Vliet Tiptree to Karma. However, also since then, several Men's Rights Acivists have infiltrated the private radical feminist blog as members - and these individuals have screen-captured and collected hundreds of pages of the conversations of O'Shaughnessy along with dozens of like-minded ideologues, including frank admissions of murderous intent, of intense gender based hatred, and a conscious will to harm or murder children. This last coming from members of the radfem-hub whose day jobs are actually the care of children. The first of a series of articles exposing a violent hate movement run by established, middle class women in academia and government will change the way you look at humanity.
Underbelly of a Hate Movement
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Hunting the Spreaders of Hate
Two days ago, I was emailed a link to the blog of a radical feminist calling herself Vliet Tiptree. I expected the usual semi-literate railing at perceived failings and evils of men, and here was no shortage of
florid censure. As expected, no substantive basis was provided for the repeated claims on equation with masculinity with evil, but thousands of words devoted to circular reiteration of idea that women are defined by their victimhood under the ubiquitous boot of “the patriarchy”. Admittedly, Tiptree calls it “the system”. The invisible, omnipresent, all powerful worldwide conspiracy in which all men consciously oppress all women. That thing which when examined from a consideration of evidence – turns out doesn't exist.
From Tiptree herself: “What I do have is an ongoing intolerable experience that this life I and other women live is blighted by male oppression, and that this blight diseases the trunk of our species’ existence, not just the branches, not just the leaves. Every moment of our existence, this blight injures us. It kills our spirits, ruins our bodies, destroys our happiness, twists our children. It has thrived for so long it sometimes seems ineradicable. This blight has many names: the Patriarchal System, Misogyny, Male Supremacy, Women’s Subjugation. “
This radical feminist blogger spends the next 20 paragraphs building a state of ecstatic victimhood. Rationalizing a moral landscape where as the permanently injured party, any act is justified. Then she works her way around to the proposed extermination of the male half of the human race.
It doesn't seem so abrupt when you take 4000 words to get there. However – Tiptree is not a women's studies sophomore temporarily enamoured with the power and possibility of newly discovered victimhood. She's a late middle aged woman whose made her life's ambition the extermination of half the human race.
Paul Elam and I intend to discover and publish her name.
florid censure. As expected, no substantive basis was provided for the repeated claims on equation with masculinity with evil, but thousands of words devoted to circular reiteration of idea that women are defined by their victimhood under the ubiquitous boot of “the patriarchy”. Admittedly, Tiptree calls it “the system”. The invisible, omnipresent, all powerful worldwide conspiracy in which all men consciously oppress all women. That thing which when examined from a consideration of evidence – turns out doesn't exist.
From Tiptree herself: “What I do have is an ongoing intolerable experience that this life I and other women live is blighted by male oppression, and that this blight diseases the trunk of our species’ existence, not just the branches, not just the leaves. Every moment of our existence, this blight injures us. It kills our spirits, ruins our bodies, destroys our happiness, twists our children. It has thrived for so long it sometimes seems ineradicable. This blight has many names: the Patriarchal System, Misogyny, Male Supremacy, Women’s Subjugation. “
This radical feminist blogger spends the next 20 paragraphs building a state of ecstatic victimhood. Rationalizing a moral landscape where as the permanently injured party, any act is justified. Then she works her way around to the proposed extermination of the male half of the human race.
It doesn't seem so abrupt when you take 4000 words to get there. However – Tiptree is not a women's studies sophomore temporarily enamoured with the power and possibility of newly discovered victimhood. She's a late middle aged woman whose made her life's ambition the extermination of half the human race.
Paul Elam and I intend to discover and publish her name.
Friday, November 4, 2011
Women and Children First
A rant observing how despite the repeated claim of women's historical oppression, men are now as they always have been - disposable human beings.
"women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat." (Hillary Clinton). Well, sure – losing family members to horrible deaths is so much worse than actually having to die those horrible deaths.
Download this episode (right click and save)
"women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat." (Hillary Clinton). Well, sure – losing family members to horrible deaths is so much worse than actually having to die those horrible deaths.
Download this episode (right click and save)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)