Why you’re (probably) a feminist or their useful idiot and a 12 step programme on how to stop being one

Many people claim they don’t like feminists and oppose feminism. However, it is my opinion that most of these people are actually nothing but feminists who don’t like the term, as they accept almost all crucial feminist lies and inventions. The thing is, feminists don’t really care about whether you call yourself a feminist or egalitarian as long as you’re in support of their crucial horrific nonsense. All these discussions on patriarchy, what it means to be a feminist or others are just them trying to win what little remaining unconquered ground is there left. But if you really want to oppose feminism and stir hatred of the feminists you must do the following things.

1. First thing’s first – start reading the right literature

You must read the following articles and books (not necessarily all of them but as many as you can find  to understand that everything modern culture has taught you is a bullshit lie. Don’t EVER trust a book written after 1960 – it is likely that the information in the book will have PC bias, which means it will be utterly worthless.

http://www.actbiblically.org/file/n4695939/db18_Fig_6.png
http://www.actbiblically.org/file/n4695936/DevlinTOQV6N2.pdf
http://www.actbiblically.org/file/n4695930/fate.pdf
http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2004/01/book-of-bonecrker.html
http://www.actbiblically.org/Human-Evolution-tt4695955.html

As for books

http://www.amazon.com/Drill-Bible-Holman-Editorial-Staff/dp/1433601729/
http://www.amazon.com/Protestant-Ethic-Spirit-Capitalism-Twentieth-Century/dp/0140439218/
http://www.amazon.com/Secret-History-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140455280/
http://www.amazon.com/Iliad-Penguin-Classics-Homer/dp/0140447946/
http://www.amazon.com/Odyssey-Penguin-Classics-Homer/dp/0140449116/
http://www.amazon.com/Livy-Early-History-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140448098/
http://www.amazon.com/The-Discourses-Livy-Niccolo-Machiavelli/dp/1420931458/
http://www.amazon.com/The-Golden-Ass-Transformations-Lucius/dp/0374531811/
http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-America-Penguin-Classics-Tocqueville/dp/0140447601/
http://www.amazon.com/SEX-AND-CULTURE-J-D-UNWIN/dp/B000K7AQFC/
http://www.amazon.com/Farewell-Alms-Economic-History-Princeton/dp/0691141282/
http://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Man-Jane-Goodall/dp/B002CMLRDI/
http://www.amazon.com/Through-Window-Thirty-Years-Chimpanzees/dp/0547336950/
http://www.amazon.com/Forest-People-Colin-Turnbull/dp/0671640992/
http://www.amazon.com/Mountain-People-Colin-M-Turnbull/dp/0671640984/

Once you have read as much as you out of these suggestions the rest should come easy, as you will recognize feminism for what it is – one the most crucial and serious symptoms of a declining culture. Babylonia and Rome both became more and more feminist as they declined.

2.  Now that you are educated recognize that vast differences between men and women make it impossible for them to be treated the same in almost anything – from the age of consent laws to them voting in the same elections. 

Not much to say. Men and women are nothing alike. Men have more in common with male chimpanzees than with women. To apply the same laws and rights when it comes to men and women on most issues is insane and could only be done by an insane culture.

3.  In relation to number 2- START OPPOSING WOMEN’S SUFFRAGE.

One cannot have any justice, democracy or fairness if men and women are voting in the same elections. Women can’t feel empathy for men and have no instinct for governing. Giving them a power to vote along with men means giving them a power to abuse men, as they’re unable to restrain their instinct for doing so. Read this brilliant post made by a commentator Franklin to understand this better and a comment in that thread explains it well too  Women should not be allowed to vote because of the practicality of the matter, in that it leads to disaster. If they are influenced by the men at the top, women will inevitably vote for them, so female voting just reinforces the ruling oligarchy. If left to their own devices, women will inevitably vote for a form of what we would call communism, where the power of the central government is extended to the greatest degree possible and used to transfer as much value to the women voters as possible, until the whole system collapses. Women are evolutionarily designed to be selfish parasites, and there is nothing wrong with this, until you base a system of government on it.

If you want equality you must reject women’s suffrage.  Modernist fools will tell not allowing women to subjugate men through the vote is considered subjugation of women. This logic is so twisted that a response is pointless. Recognize their insanity for what it is.

4. Support the idea of female premarital chastity.

All successful cultures demanded virgin brides. Men were expected to lose their virginity to prostitutes and they were allowed to use prostitutes in marriage for sexual variety if they wanted it so. The reason behind this was that sane cultures understood the enormous differences between men and women. Of course there is an asymmetry here because it isn’t acceptable for a wife to meet her needs with other men.  The reason for this is that women have a limited number of eggs, representing her reproductive capacity, while men have a virtually unlimited number of sperm, representing his reproductive capacity.  This is why men are not choosy in who they have sex with.  A man never considers the question of whether one woman or another is a better candidate for sex because he will generally want both.  But a woman always considers the comparative level of attraction when choosing a sexual partner.

Also, female premarital sex will increase the likelihood of female extramarital sex while this is not the case with men. There is even a concept of “sowing ones oats” which mean that it is best for men to get lust for variety out of their system before they get married.

5. Support the return of monogamy and strong penalties for adultery ( (like throwing out the wife and killing the other man).

All successful cultures severely punished adultery. It was rightly considered to be a similar or worse crime than rape. Any system other than monogamy isn’t the most optimal one either, as we can see in most Islamic countries which don’t have feminism but are still pretty messed up.

6. Reject alimony and child support

Both are concepts designed by liberal, feminist societies, which means societies in decline. There is no need for these in a moral monogamous society.

7. Reject the false historical narrative of female oppression.

This shouldn’t be hard to do if you read just a part of the recommended sources.

One must learn to laugh at the idea that women were ever oppressed. They were always well protected and had special privileges. This nonsensical fabrication is one that feminists push for so much and is accepted by some many people who are otherwise intelligent but it is complete nonsense. It is men who had to work much harder than women and die. I adore history and know very well that it is essentially little more than a long line of killed men.

8. Get your definition of rape right

Rape has been turned from what was once a very serious crime often punished by death to a laughing stock of most of modern Western world due to ridiculous feminist expansion of the definition of rape to include more and more things that have nothing to do with it. It is as if we call everybody stealing a chewing gum murderers. And feminists are doing this purposefully and for good reasons – the more fear and ignorance they create more power will they have and more people (mostly women) will give money to their hate cult.

Eivind Berge has words of wisdom on this issue: “…This defines rape as sex coerced by violence or serious threats, which is a reasonable definition. Simple lack of consent does not make it rape and neither does a trivial threat. The woman needs to be made to fear for her life or health. This definition is also consistent with Common Law (“Carnal knowledge of a woman forcibly and against her will”) and even with evolutionary psychology (“Human copulation resisted by the victim to the best of her ability unless such resistance would probably result in death or serious injury to her or others she commonly protects” is the definition used by Thornhill & Palmer in A Natural History of Rape). If you dilute the definition to include lower levels of sexual coercion (such as threatening to break up a relationship or start a rumor about a woman), then “rape” ceases to be a heinous crime and pretending we are dealing with the same phenomenon is dishonest.”

Stop believing that rape can be done by anything else than a penis. Insertion of an inanimate object in a penis/vagina isn’t rape but a different kind of assault.

Also, stop claiming that consensual sex with people below the age of consent is rape. It is a different crime and describing it with a word rape is only further trivializing this word which means absolutely nothing today – it is so trivialized by femifascists that sane people are probably best off inventing a new word.

9. Fight against unreasonable ages of consent

Age of consent being 16 is already extremely unreasonable and the age of consent being 18 is just insane. Human bodies are designed to have sex much earlier and sex isn’t some kind of a psychological trauma. All of these insane inventions are supported by feminists, and it is feminists who argued for the age of consent reform in USA, a reform that makes a mockery of the idea that USA was once less free – it was more free in the past.
And, remember- NOTHING FEMINIST SUPPORT CAN EVER BE GOOD FOR MEN, SOCIETY OR SANITY.

10. Reject the marital rape nonsense

A married couple has given sexual consent to each other for the duration of the marriage, so the idea of marital rape makes no sense -it is an oxymoron, just like “dry water” or “cold heat”. On the other hand, assault is always wrong and is just as much a crime when done within marriage as when done to a stranger. Therefore if a wife resists sex and the husband has to assault his wife in order to get sex, then the husband is guilty of assault and should be punished for that.


11. Reject the female sex offender charade

Probably the most successful of all feminist traps. What more proof of that statement do you need then to know that A Voice for Men, the most popular MRA site on the Internet, accepts it, even going as far to make a ludicrous, hilarious claim that boys are raped more than girls (!!!).

This imbecilic concept of women being able to rape men is so spread that even I once believed it. What opened my eyes were posts from a fantastic Norwegian MRA Eivind Berge, like this one, this one or this one.

After reading Eivind Berge I came to a conclusion that my idea that women can somehow rape men was just a consequence of me never pondering the issue for more than a few seconds – the concept is one the most laughable in the history of the world ! To believe that women can rape a man is deny basic biology, anatomy and psychology. It is an equivalent of to believe that being handed a thousand dollars is the same as being robbed of thousand dollars.

This feminist lie is one of the most dangerous ones as no other feminist lie pretends to care about male victims so much. The only problem is – there are no male victims in this case ! The real male victims here are those boys whose lovers have been taken away from them and put in prison because they were nice to them !!!


12. Acknowledge that violence against feminists is not out of the question and will likely be necessary.

Feminism is a brutal fascist hate movement that uses violence and breaks the law on a daily basis – (some examples of that).

Whoever thinks he/she can fight this vicious, sick cult with tolerance is an imbecile. Your tolerance only benefits the intolerant ones – feminists. These monsters have so much money and political power that an idea of any peaceful resolution of the feminist problem is just a fantasy. Feminists hate all who resist the hate cult and use violence against all who resist the hate cult. You need to stop considering them humans altogether – they’ve given their humanity away long ago and became automatic hate machines. Being a pacifist around them only makes you a lamb for the slaughter. You must realize that you are, as an anti-feminist, in a war and become armed – with knowledge, ideas, supporters, recruits and arms. This is a war and we are not winning it. Take your part in a battle now and attack the enemy’s vital points -they need to be burned out with both words and deeds.

***
I am also making a poll on this

41 thoughts on “Why you’re (probably) a feminist or their useful idiot and a 12 step programme on how to stop being one

  1. Excellent information.

    However, it would be better if you could pair the book references side by side; your readers would only have to scroll half as much.

    Per your survey, I’m a 12 point anti-feminist. However, who in the world is going to check boxes saying that they are a useful idiot? That’s ridiculous.

    As far as liberal verses conservative, being an atheist by itself is liberal by its very definition. In a famous American TV show, conservative Archie Bunker points the finger at his liberal son-in-law, and says “You atheist you!”

  2. However, who in the world is going to check boxes saying that they are a useful idiot?

    The problem with the term “useful idiot” is that it implicitly fails to recognise that it’s perfectly possible to be both male and a feminist.

    Speaking personally, feminism has been very good not merely for my female friends but for me personally – even on the most basic level, my sex life has been pretty terrific largely because for at least the last twenty years I’ve exclusively slept with highly intelligent women who are extremely aware of their physical desires, articulate enough to tell me what they want if I can’t work it out for myself and experienced enough to be able to surprise me with something I might not have thought independently.

    And you don’t have to be a mythical “alpha male” to enjoy something similar – merely somebody who doesn’t treat women like shit either physically, verbally or in terms of general attitude.

    What fascinates me about this blog is that you’re persistently either doing or recommending the exact opposite to what I did back in the days when I considered myself “incel” (I lost my virginity later than you did). But to what end? The only possible kind of relationship that I can see arising from attitudes like the ones underpinning your 12-step programme is a profoundly abusive one – which is also the polar opposite of anything that I’d ever want. For me, if there isn’t a bedrock of mutual respect (and by “mutual” I mean a clearly two-way process), a relationship simply isn’t going to work, or at least not for longer than a few unsatisfying couplings.

    • “The problem with the term “useful idiot” is that it implicitly fails to recognise that it’s perfectly possible to be both male and a feminist.”

      How? There is an option in the poll for male feminists, didn’t you see it?

      “Speaking personally, feminism has been very good not merely for my female friends but for me personally – even on the most basic level, my sex life has been pretty terrific largely because for at least the last twenty years I’ve exclusively slept with highly intelligent women who are extremely aware of their physical desires, articulate enough to tell me what they want if I can’t work it out for myself and experienced enough to be able to surprise me with something I might not have thought independently.And you don’t have to be a mythical “alpha male” to enjoy something similar – merely somebody who doesn’t treat women like shit either physically, verbally or in terms of general attitude. ”

      People have a wrong definition of an alpha. What are seen as alphas are actually omegas http://www.coalpha.org/Male-Mating-Strategies-td5976163.html

      As for the rest of this quote all I can say is that it is both hilarious and highly offensive, seeing that it somehow implies that incels do treat women like that. And, of course, it has nothing to do with reality as feminism is the number one cause of incel and a reason why more and more men fall into that situation.

      “What fascinates me about this blog is that you’re persistently either doing or recommending the exact opposite to what I did back in the days when I considered myself “incel” (I lost my virginity later than you did). But to what end? The only possible kind of relationship that I can see arising from attitudes like the ones underpinning your 12-step programme is a profoundly abusive one – which is also the polar opposite of anything that I’d ever want. For me, if there isn’t a bedrock of mutual respect (and by “mutual” I mean a clearly two-way process), a relationship simply isn’t going to work, or at least not for longer than a few unsatisfying couplings.”

      What fascinates me about you feminists is that you honestly believe most hilarious nonsense, like that rejecting the most heinous lies of a fascist terrorist movement means your relationship will somehow be abusive. The logic of that is so twisted that it makes your brain hurt. None of my relationships were abusive and ask Franklin and Eivind Berge, you know, the people who taught me these things, how they managed to be happily married for 22 years (Franklin) or in a relationship for over 2 years (Eivind). Heck, Eivind’s girlfriend even has a blog linked here.

      I appreciate your civility but what you’re saying here are dangerous things and more proof that feminists need to be removed from society right now.

    • “It’s perfectly possible to be both a male and a feminist.” Who in the world says it’s not possible???!!! I smell a straw man argument coming. Phew.

      Yup, great sex with many intelligent women. But what about marriage and a family? After these women stop using you as a toy yo-yo in ten years, then what?

      Feminism works in the short term but completely fails men in the long term. In this phase of feminism, some men are useful studs. But this is merely an experiment to overthrow traditional constraints. In the next phase of feminism (different women are on different phases) there will no longer be any need for useful studs to promote feminism. The damage will have been complete and irreversible.

      • Feminists are just lazy, dumb and insane. Gojira, after year and half of reading this blog, has the audacity to claim that you get women simply by not acting bad toward them. He’s not even a snake oil seller, he’s a cartoon character.

        • Gorjira probably believes his own rhetoric.

          I do believe that some men get women simply by not acting bad toward them. But this is false for most men. It could be true for a small percentage of men. From our life situation, we would never know that. It’s certainly not true for men with disabilities.

          In your 12-steps let’s mention: Whatever companies men do business with, they should research who owns the business. All women-owned businesses should be rejected in favor of male-owned businesses. MONEY IS POWER; this would help shift the balance of power. Feminist activists do the opposite; reject male-owned business in favor of women-owned.

          • Hmm.. KC, that is a good idea though I won’t expand the article for now. I think Peter Andrew Nolan and Bill Greathouse (that TFL guy) actually started something that had the same idea, some business project… I don’t feel like looking it up now but I might if you’re interested.

  3. All I’m saying is that we as individuals should find out who owns the businesses we frequent, whether insurance companies, restaurants, computer firms, or whatever. Then we substitute male-owned companies if any are female-owned. No special business project required.

    • You people are mental. Most companies are already owned and operated by men anyway. Who are you boycotting? Who are you afraid of? What could empowered women possibly do to you except refuse to fuck you, date you or marry you? I believe the reason you hate feminism so much is that it offers women the option to be more than an accessory to men’s lives; to choose for themselves how far they will go and the lifestyle they will lead. One of your quotes mentions that women are “leeches” but it’s okay, in a certain context (that context being that they have zero autonomy). Did it ever occur to you that many women have no intention of having to depend on a partnership and/or marriage to live their lives? That maybe they can get further on their own than they ever could while having to care for a person who thinks certain types of rape can be trivialized and women have no say in how their society should be structured? Maybe it’s that women don’t actually need men. That must be scary for you. Thank little baby Jesus your type is a dying breed and essentially the loudest moment of the death rattle of patriarchy in North America. I guesstimate it’ll be about 30 years before things are truly equal, but that puts you in a senior’s centre, where people will care even less about your opinion than they do now.

      • I’ll reply to this though it wasn’t intended for me

        “What could empowered women possibly do to you except refuse to fuck you, date you or marry you? ”

        You obviously don’t understand how insane this question is. It’s like asking “What could a violent person possibly do to you than beat you, injure you or kill you?” This is an incel blog. It describes the immense pain incel creates. Incel is a horrible deprivation that not many people could bear. Some of the posts here even describe the fates of people who have taken their lives and the lives of others because of it
        http://thatincelblogger.wordpress.com/2012/09/23/three-very-different-victims-of-involuntary-celibacy/
        http://thatincelblogger.wordpress.com/2013/12/21/another-victim-of-incel-dies/

        Now, I didn’t delete or edit this post because it broke no rules but be careful on how you talk about incel here.

        “I believe the reason you hate feminism so much is that it offers women the option to be more than an accessory to men’s lives; to choose for themselves how far they will go and the lifestyle they will lead. ”

        No, I hate it because it’s a hateful, terrorist movement that seeks to destroy all decent people, men and women.

        “One of your quotes mentions that women are “leeches” but it’s okay, in a certain context (that context being that they have zero autonomy)”

        Most women are always leeches in one form or another. In patriarchy they are leeching from their husbands and in feminist societies they are leeching from the government. But the government takes its money from men who are no longer able to have wives due to feminism and this can’t go on forever. One day these frustrated men will rebel. I, for one, will never be working until I find a partner.

        ” Did it ever occur to you that many women have no intention of having to depend on a partnership and/or marriage to live their lives? ”

        Perfectly fine by me, as long as they don’t depend on government help like AA and aren’t allowed to abuse men via women’s suffrage. We’ll see how successful most of them will be in a truly free market.

        “That maybe they can get further on their own than they ever could while having to care for a person who thinks certain types of rape can be trivialized and women have no say in how their society should be structured?”

        I don’t particularly understand this sentence. Maybe you wanted to say while “not having to care”? Anyway, you’re dogmatically stating some things as facts – you claim that denying that some actions that have nothing to do with rape and have been called rape due to feminist corruption of law is trivialization of rape. No, it is exactly the opposite – those things aren’t rape and saying it is trivialization. Just like a bank robbery would be trivialized if we said that stealing a chewing gum is bank robbery.

        Same with this thing on how women should have no say in how society should be structured – you are refusing to recognize that they lack empathy for men. It is well explained why in that article.

        “Maybe it’s that women don’t actually need men. That must be scary for you. ”

        That’s not scary for me as it is utter nonsense, which you’d see if you lived without men in the world for a couple of hours. What is scary to me is this way of thinking. Luckily, your genocidal utopia will never come true and in just a couple of decades we will return to patriarchy.

        “Thank little baby Jesus your type is a dying breed and essentially the loudest moment of the death rattle of patriarchy in North America. I guesstimate it’ll be about 30 years before things are truly equal, but that puts you in a senior’s centre, where people will care even less about your opinion than they do now.”

        You are ignorant of history. Any society where feminism appears is already beyond salvation, as history proves. Also, I like how somebody who mentions that women might not need men talks about equality. Ugh. No, equality will never be achieved nor has it ever existed. What does exist is men governing women and women governing men. First approach is a healthy one, the other one is a disaster, as visible by your post.

        • I do not believe that women should rule men, but nor do I believe men should rule women. You’ve taken your personal terror of women and delusionaly applied it to society at large. Women do not hold all the cards, and never have. Saying women do not have empathy for men is crazy. I have three sons, I raise, sans leeching, by choice. I have immense empathy for the things they will have to go through as they grow, especially the rejection, but I won’t raise them to believe they are entitled to the affection or attention of any person who doesn’t offer it of their own accord. Indeed, they won’t be taught they’re entitled to anything they haven’t worked for or been offered willingly. And you’re right, I don’t understand what you’re going through, but that doesn’t mean I discount it, will ever tell you that you’re wrong or that you’re imagining it. I just think you’re focussing your issues in the wrong direction. Btw there has never actually been a matriarchal society, only smaller matrilineal societies. Again I don’t WANT matriarchy, you’re just spouting an opinion of a hypothetical society that has no precedent, although I do believe that a matriarchy would disempower men as patriarchy has women. I never said I wanted a world without men, I said women don’t need men. To extrapolate, women don’t need men today the same way they have historically. It’s completely possible for a woman to head her own family and take care of herself and her children independently of anyone else. Not needing someone is not the same as having no respect for them, or not acknowledging they have an important and vital place in the world. (I’m not a proponent of genocide or gendercide and it’s strange that you took not needing men to mean I thought we should do away with them all together. Women still WANT men) I’m also not saying that every woman would want to be that independent, but the fact that it’s possible is clearly scary for people like you. It means we don’t have to accept (marry) people we do to want to be with, just to avoid being societal pariahs. I happen to quite like sane men, who recognize rape for what it is, respect women, and treat them to the best of their ability, without patronizing or objectifying them. And no there has never been a society in which men and women have had equal power and are seen for their character and qualities, rather than their genitalia, but we’re closer to that now than we ever have been. Historically, all civilizations have risen and declined, and that’s where our agreement ends. You would argue that it’s women’s rights, some would argue it’s homosexuality, or some depravity (what’s depraved is a matter of perspective), but correlation isn’t causation, and not every failed society embraced homosexuality or women’s rights, and they failed anyway. The most common denominator is that they were all patriarchies. Patriarchy is not sustainable, because it leaves over half the population without representation or as you would say “empathy.”
          And the sentence that confused you, was written as I intended it. Women can get further when they don’t have to care for men. That is not to say don’t care ABOUT men, but that they can further themselves when they do not have to assume a caretaker’s role, in the home. That shit is insanely boring. Anyway, I’m sorry women have apparently been hard for you to interact with, but we’re not bad, and making a better place in society for ourselves is not bad. No one wants to take away men’s rights unless they’re misandrists, and I don’t know many women who truly hate men, even when they think their ideas and opinions are completely wrong.

          • Missy,

            You blaspheme the role that God gave women. That comes from Modernist propaganda.

            And where in the world do you get the bizarre notion that societies failed because of patriarchy? Societies failed because of race mixing and multiculturalism. This is documented.

          • “I do not believe that women should rule men, but nor do I believe men should rule women.”

            Alright, but even if you don’t believe it/want it you are still advocating it unconsciously by advocating women’s suffrage. But I know you won’t agree with that so there is no point in explaining it further.

            “You’ve taken your personal terror of women and delusionaly applied it to society at large.”

            My personal terror of women? What does that even mean?

            ” Saying women do not have empathy for men is crazy. I have three sons, I raise, sans leeching, by choice. I have immense empathy for the things they will have to go through as they grow, especially the rejection, but I won’t raise them to believe they are entitled to the affection or attention of any person who doesn’t offer it of their own accord. Indeed, they won’t be taught they’re entitled to anything they haven’t worked for or been offered willingly.”

            You raise three sons but do you raise them alone?

            Anyway, I don’t think I’m entitled to anything, if that’s what you wanted to say. Nor do I think anybody else here is.

            “Btw there has never actually been a matriarchal society, only smaller matrilineal societies. Again I don’t WANT matriarchy, you’re just spouting an opinion of a hypothetical society that has no precedent, although I do believe that a matriarchy would disempower men as patriarchy has women.”

            Scientists still can’t agree on whether or not it existed and why bringing that up anyway? And, no, patriarchy, however you see it, didn’t disempower women, who were always in a better position than men. But I know we will never agree on that either.

            ” never said I wanted a world without men, I said women don’t need men. To extrapolate, women don’t need men today the same way they have historically. It’s completely possible for a woman to head her own family and take care of herself and her children independently of anyone else. ”

            Ok, I made a mistake in the previous post. In any case, I have two questions about that: 1. Is it under the condition that their father agrees with that or is his will irrelevant? 2. By “independently of anyone else” do you mean without AA, child support or alimony?

            ” I’m also not saying that every woman would want to be that independent, but the fact that it’s possible is clearly scary for people like you.”

            What is scary for me is that women want to be “independent” by using AA, child support, alimony and other benefits while I’m supposed to pay for that and be single.

            ” I happen to quite like sane men, who recognize rape for what it is, respect women, and treat them to the best of their ability, without patronizing or objectifying them”

            Sane men recognize rape for what it actually is, but I know we’ll never agree there either. As for other things you mention, ok, I guess I believe you.

            “and no there has never been a society in which men and women have had equal power and are seen for their character and qualities, rather than their genitalia, but we’re closer to that now than we ever have been. ”

            Yes, there has never been such a society nor will there ever be, as such a society is impossible. Right now the pendulum has already swung way on the side of women.

            “Historically, all civilizations have risen and declined, and that’s where our agreement ends. You would argue that it’s women’s rights, some would argue it’s homosexuality, or some depravity (what’s depraved is a matter of perspective), but correlation isn’t causation, and not every failed society embraced homosexuality or women’s rights, and they failed anyway.”

            Nonsense. No books or studies ever claimed that homosexuality is what created a declining civilization. Homosexuals were, are and always will be a too tiny minority to do that.
            And while it is true that not all failed societies embraced women’s rights collapsed
            the problem is that all who did embrace them did collapse.

            “The most common denominator is that they were all patriarchies. Patriarchy is not sustainable, because it leaves over half the population without representation or as you would say “empathy.”

            This is the most insane thing I have ever heard. Unwin and Devlin clearly explain why those societies collapsed when patriarchal values eroded. This is just an example of feminist ignorance of history.

            “And the sentence that confused you, was written as I intended it. Women can get further when they don’t have to care for men. ”

            Your sentence was ““That maybe they can get further on their own than they ever could while having to care for a person who thinks certain types of rape can be trivialized and women have no say in how their society should be structured?” (italics mine) so I’m still confused.

            “That is not to say don’t care ABOUT men, but that they can further themselves when they do not have to assume a caretaker’s role, in the home. That shit is insanely boring. Anyway, I’m sorry women have apparently been hard for you to interact with, but we’re not bad, and making a better place in society for ourselves is not bad. No one wants to take away men’s rights unless they’re misandrists, and I don’t know many women who truly hate men, even when they think their ideas and opinions are completely wrong.”

            Of course, all of this is imbecilic patronizing bullcrap, especially the part about interacting with women having been hard for me (I never said that at all and the problems I describe on this blog are vastly more complex). In any case, you won’t even read Unwin or Devlin nor will you try to understand why what you see as making a better place in society for yourself leads to a death of this society so what’s the point, really?”

        • Hey, I’m a single woman who works a full time job to support myself, an honest job that I’m good at, and I work hard every day to make good money for my employer so I can earn my modest paycheck. I do not receive any government assistance, I live alone, I pay all of my own bills, and I’m a voluntary celibate that generally prefers to keep to myself. And I am happier now than I have ever been in my life, including the time when I was married. Does this make you feel threatened?

          You say women can’t empathize with men? I do it all the time, so I’m living proof you’re wrong. I side with them on a lot of issues and I feel bad for them when I see that they have been mistreated. Such as alimony, I agree that should go away. Alimony was only necessary when women weren’t allowed to work and own property on their own. But child support? You think horny men should just be allowed to go around fucking every woman they can get their hands on, impregnating them accidentally because they won’t wear condoms after they guild the women into giving in to it by making them feel afraid of being abandoned, when all they can actually think about is the meaningless act of sex itself with no intention or desire to procreate, and then dump them as soon as they pop positive so they don’t have to bear the burden of helping to raise their own offspring and they can go on fucking like wild animals and the government has to pick up the tab to provide for all the litters they trail behind them with our tax dollars? Unless you seriously believe that single mothers should be solely responsible and expected to simultaneously work and raise children on their own after their deadbeat boyfriends leave them. That is absurd.

          The idea you want to take away women’s right to vote is also absurd. There is no logic to that other than you just want to force women to be your slaves because you don’t have what it takes to earn the trust and respect needed for a healthy, consensual relationship, and you admittedly can’t function without sex. So you want to change the law to force all women to just be at your mercy so you can just do whatever you want to them. You can’t even hold a job without a sex partner at your disposal and that is truly pathetic. It says what kind of a man you really are, a needy one that can’t be trusted to protect or provide for anyone and only has his own selfish interested in mind, which basically revolves around sex. So who do you think you are, trying to tell anyone else what to do or how to live? TIB- ok, what I deleted here was quite too much and broke several rules, I am warning you not to do this again, especially diagnosing.

          • “Does this make you feel threatened?”

            Since I presume you don’t have any kids… Well, unless you were ever a beneficiary of AA – no.

            “You say women can’t empathize with men? I do it all the time, so I’m living proof you’re wrong. I side with them on a lot of issues and I feel bad for them when I see that they have been mistreated.”

            I think parts of your post I had to delete here, like those about castrating bulls and other heinous shit disprove that.

            “But child support? You think horny men should just be allowed to go around fucking every woman they can get their hands on, impregnating them accidentally because they won’t wear condoms after they guild the women into giving in to it by making them feel afraid of being abandoned, when all they can actually think about is the meaningless act of sex itself with no intention or desire to procreate, and then dump them as soon as they pop positive so they don’t have to bear the burden of helping to raise their own offspring and they can go on fucking like wild animals and the government has to pick up the tab to provide for all the litters they trail behind them with our tax dollars? Unless you seriously believe that single mothers should be solely responsible and expected to simultaneously work and raise children on their own after their deadbeat boyfriends leave them. That is absurd.”

            Well, that’s just brilliant. Women have no responsibility, but their deadbeat boyfriends do. Yes, I think single mothers who were impregnated by deadbeat thugs should handle it on their own. Maybe they’ll learn some responsibility in the process.

            “The idea you want to take away women’s right to vote is also absurd. There is no logic to that other than you just want to force women to be your slaves because you don’t have what it takes to earn the trust and respect needed for a healthy, consensual relationship, and you admittedly can’t function without sex. So you want to change the law to force all women to just be at your mercy so you can just do whatever you want to them.”

            This is simply not true. Arguments to why women’s suffrage is an enslavement of men are explained here

            I can’t function without both relationships and sex. I am asking you to read my definition of incel on one of the pages.

            “You can’t even hold a job without a sex partner at your disposal and that is truly pathetic. It says what kind of a man you really are, a needy one that can’t be trusted to protect or provide for anyone and only has his own selfish interested in mind, which basically revolves around sex. So who do you think you are, trying to tell anyone else what to do or how to live?”

            The main reason why I don’t hold a job is because I don’t want to finance a femifascist society that keeps me incel. Could you explain to me why I should do that when I would never have a gf anyway?
            Depression due to incel is only a secondary reason.

            If you have empathy for men, as you claim you do, why can’t you understand that?

            Also, please check my comments policy. Your first comment broke some rules, like the rule that forbids diagnosing or a rule that forbids saying incel is just about sex. I didn’t even edit some parts where you mentioned sex so that I don’t ruin the context but note that this is not allowed.

      • Missy,

        I NEVER trivialized rape! My punishment for rapists would be castration. My book is the website http://www.wowedbytruth.com Chapter 36.Cheerio under Crime and Punishment.

        These other guys trivialize rape, but they are not Christians; I am. I am trying to influence them.

        Jesus never advocated feminism; NEVER; neither did the early Church fathers.

        Because of feminism, women can abort their babies (murder). That’s worse than rape.

        It occurs to me 365 days a year that more and more women want nothing to do with men, although God created the woman for the man.

        In 30 years hopefully I’ll be dead. On Judgment Day, let’s see what God thinks of all the hippie social experiments.

        • My comment was more in response to the discussion you two were having and points in the original post.
          To me, trivializing rape is saying only certain types of rape are valid, which incelblogger did.
          The bible never mentions abortions either (the bible only really mentions general pregnancy , from my recollection, in that life starts at first breath, and if a woman miscarries because a man hurt her, that man must give her husband a gold piece), even though they have been performed in one way or another for as long as women have been able to procreate. My guess is that women’s rights and issues weren’t a huge deal to the men who wrote the bible.
          Maybe men need to step up their game a little bit if they want women to remain interested. Clearly being “taken care of” didn’t appeal to women for very long, so maybe men should work on being more appealing in their character, interests, opinions and depth. I’m not saying these are your personal issues, just that men in general seem to feel they have some sort of entitlement to women. Not everyone believes women were “made for” men. Your beliefs are your own and I am not trying to belittle them, but you can’t expect everyone to believe what you do, and demonizing feminists, isn’t going to win many of them over to Christianity, and certainly won’t make women in general more interested in spending time with men who espouse incelblogger’s opinions.

          • Abortion has been considered murder for 2,000 years of Christian history. See my chapter 26.Social Lunacy under The Very Young.

            Actually, very few people today believe that women were made for men. But everyone believed it for many thousands or perhaps millions of years of human history. My beliefs are not my own; I changed my beliefs to match historical beliefs.

            I’ll go even further than what you said; I might become the only one on Earth who believes as I do (traditional values). Therefore I’ll be thankful when I’m dead; then I’ll just wait for Judgment Day.

            I hear you: demonizing feminists won’t win many of them to Christianity. We don’t want to demonize gays, don’t want to demonize abortionists, don’t want to demonize liars, thieves, druggies, etc.

            So now we have a person who is a liar, thief, cheat, drug addict, drunk, engages in homosexual orgies, and does nothing for anyone but himself.

            But hooray! He believes in Jesus! Is that the point you’re trying to make? Of course we will win people to Christ if we throw out the rules!

            Abortion, homosexuality, divorce, pornography, all shot up in direct proportion to feminism. They all parallel feminism exactly.

            • Again, not everyone believes those things are wrong. Abortion, feminism, and homosexuality are only “problems” according to you, and I quite like that your belief system can no longer squelch mine. Again, no where in the bible, does it say, that abortion is wrong. You are obviously free to believe what you want, but so is everyone else. And while you wait for judgment day to prove me wrong, KC, what are you doing on a daily basis to show the world the true value of Christianity? Feeding the poor? Giving to the needy? Caring for the orphans, widows and other dependents of our society? Or are you sitting behind your computer screen pontificating and writing sexist, racist, and other hateful nonsense, after which you throw your hands up in the air at the thought of our declining society? The log in your own eye, you know? Unless incelblogger has anything else to say, peace and love, you guys. I don’t think of either of you as my enemy, and hope you both figure yourselves out one day.

              • Missy, slight correction here.

                Abortion, feminism, and homosexuality are only problems to: NOT ME, but to historical Christianity.

                “I quite like that: NOT YOUR, but historical Christianity’s belief system can no longer squelch mine.” Yes, but this is temporary.

                Although the Bible doesn’t use the word abortion, it condemns abortion by implication.

                Feeding the poor, giving to the needy, and caring for orphans, widows, and other dependents of our society is highly commendable. Now why are many poor today? From having no father, which feminism often creates.

                I’m not in a position to care for orphans, widows, and other dependents; I’m a dependent myself. And abortion is doing the opposite of caring for dependents. It is killing those who depend on others most.

                I’ve done a lot to give food, clothing, and other items to the needy. This obviously can’t be done every day, unless you are Bill Gates. And discouraging people from acting out homosexually helps prevent them from dying of AIDS; I donate the gift of life.

                “Sexist, racist, and other hateful nonsense.” Okay, now my beliefs are those of everyone throughout millions of years of world history; prove me wrong. So you judge the entire old world; what happened to Judge not?

                We might all have logs in our eyes; I pray for myself as I pray for others. And I often throw my hands up because I can’t fight the entire world.

                I wish you the best, and the best is traditional Christian values. Take care.

          • “To me, trivializing rape is saying only certain types of rape are valid, which incelblogger did.”

            Again, how do you expect to have a debate if you state your own delusional opinion as the only one? This is like saying “saying that only certain types of bank robberies are valid because you refuse to include stealing a chewing gum in them is bad, mkyaaay”. Statutory rape isn’t rape but some other crime and female on male rape never existed, it’s merely a feminist invention designed to hurt men.

            “Maybe men need to step up their game a little bit if they want women to remain interested. Clearly being “taken care of” didn’t appeal to women for very long, so maybe men should work on being more appealing in their character, interests, opinions and depth.”

            Yes, what you’re saying is that men should turn to seduction. But what you don’t understand is that seduction is disastrous for society.
            Please read these articles to understand
            http://www.coalpha.org/Male-Mating-Strategies-td5976163.html
            http://www.coalpha.org/Misuse-of-terms-like-quot-alpha-quot-td6095159.html#a6154811
            http://www.biblicjudaism.org/Human-Evolution-td17.html
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisherian_runaway

            Men who used seduction throughout the past were rightly seen as utter scum as seduction has no evolutionary benefit.

            You show yourself to be very ignorant when you say that women didn’t appreciate being taken care of for long- they did, in every successful cultures. Only when seducers (omegas) take over is when seduction becomes the primary means of reproduction – with disastrous consequences.

            ” I’m not saying these are your personal issues, just that men in general seem to feel they have some sort of entitlement to women. Not everyone believes women were “made for” men. Your beliefs are your own and I am not trying to belittle them, but you can’t expect everyone to believe what you do, and demonizing feminists, isn’t going to win many of them over to Christianity, and certainly won’t make women in general more interested in spending time with men who espouse incelblogger’s opinions.”

            1. Please don’t use imbecilic buzzwords like “entitlement” for they don’t mean anything.

            2. You clearly don’t know anything about what women are attracted to. None of the women I’ve went out with knew about my attitudes and still rejected me. In fact, women like men with a spine and I think intelligent women seeing somebody espouse these attitudes will be more likely to attracted to them. The problem is that there aren’t many intelligent women (or people in general) so espousing these ideas to dumb women won’t help. But then again, neither will hiding them.

            The reasons why I’m actually not attractive to women are well explained in some of the articles here, like Darkness or LS- part 1.

      • Sorry. This is either the worst troll ever, or you are literally the lowest point of humanity to currently exist. If it is a troll, it’s not funny, or clever really. You’re basically just posting what people thought up to a century or two ago, and it’s far too broad to be satire. It also fails to really satirise anything.

        • No, I am obviously not a troll since many people here know me and have commented on this blog for years and

          ” literally the lowest point of humanity to currently exist”

          I think those would be feminists, dear.

          ” You’re basically just posting what people thought up to a century or two ago, and it’s far too broad to be satire. It also fails to really satirise anything.”

          Because it’s not satire. People thought that in the past when West was a sane and successful society. They no longer think that because lunatics like you have taken over and made it insane and unsuccessful. And that’s why it will die, just like any society where feminism has appeared.

          Also, could any of you feminists point me out to a Fb group that posted a link to this article and brought you here? I’d like to participate in the discussion.

  4. Sorry I had to start a new thread, the lines in the other one were getting a little tight. Incelblogger, are you really saying that as a woman, my opinion as to what constitutes rape means less than yours? And no I’m not suggesting men be seductive, I’m suggesting they actually have a well-rounded personality, good character, and the ability to see women as people instead of objectifying them. This isn’t intended to be mean, but if you knew more about what women want than me, or anyone at all, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. You especially wouldn’t have this blog. If you think your attitudes aren’t apparent, even when you aren’t actively telling people what they are, you’re quite mistaken. It’s apparent even in second level, shallow conversation, whether or not a man respects women. I get it, your life is hard, engaging with women is difficult, but it’s not feminism’s fault, and it’s not the fault of the women around you. Even if patriarchy were in full-swing, how would your life be different? You would still have the same issues approaching women you have now. You definitely have my pity regarding that, but no one can do the legwork for that issue, except you. Blaming feminism and women not wanting to settle for being a second-rate citizen, or not want wanting to be married to a less-than stellar person, is somewhat infantile. It’s probably easier, but it’s silly. I’m all finished. Peace out!

    • “Incelblogger, are you really saying that as a woman, my opinion as to what constitutes rape means less than yours?”

      Muahahaha. Oh, feminists… Always so deliciously insane and ready to shock you with the dumbest fabrication at any moment. No, your opinion as to what constitutes rape means less than mine not because you’re a woman but because you’re – wrong ! For example, your beliefs that women can rape men go against basic biology and anatomy and your idea that statutory rape is rape is just applying that term to something that doesn’t describe rape. There are women who understand what rape is, like http://emmatheemo.wordpress.com/

      “And no I’m not suggesting men be seductive, I’m suggesting they actually have a well-rounded personality, good character, and the ability to see women as people instead of objectifying them.”

      All of these things are extremely subjective. For example, if you asked people who know me irl if I fit these criteria all of them would say yes. Yet I am still incel. How do you explain Red pill guys like Roosh banging all these women? All of them are crazy right? There’s a world full of good women but I can’t seem to get a single one because I am bad, right?

      “This isn’t intended to be mean, but if you knew more about what women want than me, or anyone at all, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. You especially wouldn’t have this blog. ”

      But that’s complete nonsense and just a concealed personal attack. Just because I know what women want doesn’t mean I can give it to them.

      “If you think your attitudes aren’t apparent, even when you aren’t actively telling people what they are, you’re quite mistaken. It’s apparent even in second level, shallow conversation, whether or not a man respects women.”

      You’re a stupid liar using shaming. I was a liberal feminist once and had less success with women then when I became a reactionary. I lost my virginity and slept with 4 women only after I became a reactionary. How does that fit into your crap?

      ” I get it, your life is hard, engaging with women is difficult, but it’s not feminism’s fault, and it’s not the fault of the women around you. Even if patriarchy were in full-swing, how would your life be different? You would still have the same issues approaching women you have now. ”

      If patriarchy were in full swing I wouldn’t even have to approach women. I’d get them by being a good provider. No seduction would be needed at all. You see, women don’t go fall for seduction naturally. They fall for whatever male behavior is the most successful at the moment. As I told you, men who used seduction were seen as utter scum in history by both men and women.
      But since I can’t get women by being a good provider nor can I learn to seduce them I am what I am- voluntarily unemployed and somebody who’s given up on life.

      “Blaming feminism and women not wanting to settle for being a second-rate citizen, or not want wanting to be married to a less-than stellar person, is somewhat infantile. It’s probably easier, but it’s silly. I’m all finished. Peace out!”

      Women never wanted suffrage en masse. Only a tiny fraction of women, supported by immoral men, advocated for women’s suffrage. Women accepted it en masse when it became a norm, as women always go for norms. If men revoked it tomorrow women would clamor a bit and then accept it once the lack of it became a cultural norm again.

      As for less-than-stellar person, that truly is hilarious. I wonder why the enormous? divorce rate if all women marry stellar husbands? And why do groups like Hasidic Jews or Mormons have extremely low divorce rates?

      “I’m all finished. Peace out!”

      Look and behold at feminist stupidity, readers. This is what feminism is. Stupidity.

  5. Hi,

    Do you have anything to support the assertion that “women can’t feel empathy for men”? It seems like such a broad statement to leave unquestioned!

    • http://www.coalpha.org/Against-Women-s-Suffrage-td7575097.html

      Now let’s consider the other issue, which is whether women are qualified to vote. As I pointed out regarding teens, the issue here isn’t intelligence. The issue is whether the mental framework of a teen or a woman is well suited for making wise voting choices. If we look at how primitive people of the past organized themselves in tribes, or how chimpanzees organize themselves today, we see that the tribe is always governed by a group of men/males. And because men were in this position, men evolved to have the right instincts for governing. In particular, men have a strong sense of fairness, of loyalty to a group, and an instinct to protect everyone, including women and children, in the group. Women have none of these instincts. Women developed instincts suited to their role in primitive tribes, which was primarily focused on the family and on personal connections. Women excel in these areas, none of which have anything to do with good governance. The extreme difference between men and women is obvious to anyone who hasn’t been brainwashed by feminism. Consider how a man reacts to a woman crying out in distress compared to how a woman would react to a man crying out in distress. Men instinctually protect women in their tribe, but women only instinctually protect children and people they are connected to. And because of these differences, men are qualified to vote but women are not.

      • Hi,

        I had, in fact, read the entire post you linked to, as well as your own comments on the post. That was why I wanted to investigate the basic assumption that you make, from which all your other claims follow, that women cannot feel empathy for men. (This idea occurs again when you say “Consider how a man reacts to a woman crying out in distress compared to how a woman would react to a man crying out in distress.)

        What is your support for these claims — either the general claim that women cannot feel empathy for men, or that women would not run to a man crying out in distress? I agree that it is MORE LIKELY that a man would come to help a woman than the other way around, for the sole reason that violence by men against women is widespread and widely-feared — a woman, hearing a man cry for help, might fear a trick or an attack, might think she will be kidnapped or raped or worse. But if the man seems unarmed, and genuine, and helpless, I believe that a woman would behave the same way a man would.

        I just don’t know how on earth one could back up such enormous statements like “women don’t feel empathy for men.”

        • I just don’t know how on earth one could back up such enormous statements like “women don’t feel empathy for men.”
          So all those homeless shelters for women, have shared the money the receive, by providing care and accommodation for homeless men?
          Why, of course not.
          Because only women are oppressed. Since they make up a lower proportion of the homeless.

          • Men-only shelters exist as well: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dhs/html/housing/single.shtml

            I don’t know whether the women’s shelters share money with the men’s shelter, or whether the men’s shelter shares money with the women’s shelters. Perhaps they all share resources, since they’re part of the same misison; perhaps not. Maybe the fact that there are two women’s shelters and only one men’s shelter means that women do get more money; maybe the two women’s shelters are small, and the one men’s one is really big. We don’t know.

            I chose New York State at random and counted the number of men’s shelters (http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/states/new_york/homeless/menshelters) to be 6, and the number of women’s shelters (http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/states/new_york/homeless/womenshelters) to be 11, so you’re right: there are more women’s shelters than men’s shelters. However, I feel like this can be pretty reasonably explained by the fact that many women in homeless shelters are fleeing domestic violence — 1 out of 4 women will experience domestic violence in their lifetimes! Men experience domestic violence and rape much less often than women (whatever your views on women and rape, you will agree that men are raped less often than women), and so it stands to reason that women would be more eager for single-sex shelters. Thus: more women-only shelters, and then mostly men in mixed-gender shelters.

            Also, your accusation that women’s shelters aren’t “sharing” their money implies that women’s shelters are entirely run by women, which is probably rarely true. Look, here’s an example — my first Google hit for “women’s shelter”: http://www.henrystreet.org/about/who-we-are/board-of-directors.html The board seems reasonably mixed-gender.

            Last big — can you PROVE that they have “of course not” shared money with men-only shelters?

  6. I am really starting to believe, from everything I have read from these males over the last few days is that we should adopt what happens in nature over these “societies” in place now.

    Much like elephants, women live together no males, when males reach a certain age they go off and be as violent and aggressive as they like but they are not welcome in female society.

    He is right, after all I have seen we aren’t alike and we can’t live together. Women need to adopt the nature model, males leave the roost and women live together without their hostility and bloodied competition.

    • You see, guys? Even this kind of crazy gets published if you don’t break these rules.

      Innara, do you really want this just because of a small percentage of incel males? I don’t buy it at all.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

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