Tuesday - Jul 16, 2019

The Fascism of Feminism that hasn’t been shown – PART 2 AND LAST


Dear readers;

As I was growing up, I observed how men were being cornered by society, little by little. The police, the courts, and other parts of the government have weakened men’s position of power. No longer are they treated with respect and have been taken out of the traditional role of the ‘man of the house, the breadwinner;’ they are losing court battles, and sometimes landing on the streets with almost nothing after a divorce, while the court chase him for not paying child support even when they had no job. They sometime are put in jail.

Sometimes this happens while the woman is employed and is making more than is necessary to live comfortably, and while is accompanied by a new man in her life.

The following article, which has no author, should be read by everyone in order to better understand the injustices committed against men by a brainwashed society that has been made to believe that men are the evil ones, while for whom no one raises a hand on his behalf. PART 2 AND LAST.

The Fascism of Feminism that hasn’t been shown

This essay examines some of the issues closely related to feminist campaigning, providing gender balance on subjects such as domestic violence, dispelling feminist myths, while analyzing the behavior of women in 21st century Britain.

by anonymous author

Many unsuccessful or unhappy people project their own failings onto different social groups in society, sub-consciously blaming others for their own personal issues. It’s a common psychological process and feminists are no different. This scapegoating invariably leads to persecution.

Many of these feminist campaigners have an irrational fear of men, and want to create a more feminized society where men are demasculated and controlled. They attempt to hijack every issue, and are only capable of viewing these issues from a self-interested, narrow-minded perspective.

These feminists are not interested in men’s opinions or understanding their emotions, they just make narrow-minded assumptions, feeding off each others ignorance and paranoia. Leaders of feminist groups, especially the more accessible internet pages on social network sites frighten and manipulate young women into seeing men as the enemy, exploiting their fears and fuelling their paranoia. Every man is a potential killer, rapist, sex offender or pedophile in their eyes, and this irrational fear is inherited by young impressionable women who may think the causes are just. It’s a form of grooming which needs to be urgently addressed.

Many influential feminists appear to revel in creating a barrier between men and women, fortifying it at any given opportunity, failing to understand the dynamic between men and women as a result of their own sexual orientation. These humorless, profoundly negative women need a war, a fight to give their life meaning.

No matter how powerful women become in society, these feminists will always pursue this agenda. If these campaigners are so intelligent and so useful, why don’t they contribute to society instead of consuming much of their time seeking out perceived sexism on the internet? How useful are these feminists in society?

They certainly don’t help society by propagating hate, and I doubt they help the majority of fair-minded women. They seem to have so much campaigning time as a result of their misanthropic tendencies but seem unable to put their rhetoric into practice. They are destructive, not constructive people. Their motivation is negative, not positive. Healthy women do NOT become feminists. Women are more likely to succeed in life if they haven’t been brainwashed with stifling feminist dogma. It gives them an excuse for failure, a reason not to try, and a persecution complex. Most women will grow out of feminist campaigning by their early/mid twenties, as they realize that sitting at a computer, developing a persecution complex does nothing to further their career, or their emotional development.

Some feminist organizations campaign vociferously against men’s playful, gentle ‘sexism’ which often involves complementing women on their physical appearance, celebrating the female form as art has always done, yet they seem oblivious to their own brand of harmful, spiteful, sadistic sexism, intended to make men feel inadequate, useless, and humiliated.

They believe women are viewed as sex objects in the media, yet men’s magazines are far less harmful than women’s gossip magazines, which show nasty undercover photographs of women with cellulite, or without make-up intended to humiliate the celebrity and comfort the lesser attractive readers. Their agenda is bitchy and spiteful, an attack on women, not a celebration.

Men would never disrespect women in this way. Women are the enemy of women, they always have been. The campaign against ‘lads’ mags’ in the UK by groups such as UK Feminista and Women’s Aid is a prime example of their controlling, fascist agenda. They believe that photos of semi-naked women cause men to act violently towards women.

This clearly demonstrates their contempt and lack of understanding of men. By their own terms, violence by women towards men must result from sexual images of men in girl’s and women’s magazines too then? Or does this psychological phenomenon not affect women? There are many semi-naked images of boy bands and sports stars in these publications. Maybe the content in women’s magazines creates a profoundly negative perception of men, which we find offensive? Do they consider this?

Clearly some women are intolerant of men interacting with women in a sexual way. This could easily be construed as heterophobia. Who decides what is pornographic, art, or fashion? Feminist extremists? Just because we don’t like something that doesn’t mean it should be banned. I’m sure many people are offended by hunting magazines in supermarkets showing carcasses resulting from ‘sporting’ endeavors. Some supermarkets have felt compelled to remove men’s magazines from their shelves as a result of legal threats and bullying by these feminist organizations. They even claim that female supermarket workers are being sexually harassed by being in the presence of these magazines!

The campaign to ban men’s magazines is one of the most misguided and ineffectual campaigns ever staged by feminists, and the battle to save them has become a metaphor in the fight against the control feminists seek to impose on men. Banning them would amount to a token act of symbolism, unlikely to have any meaningful impact on society.

Individuals and small groups should never be allowed to control society, that’s not what democracy is about, but then UK Feminista is an anti-democratic organization which believes that feminism should be at the centre of politics, which clearly demonstrates a desire for self-righteous control, and not equality. Organizations such as this create a climate of misogyny and man-hating, which is far more likely to cause sexism and domestic violence than the men’s magazines they seek to ban.

The editor of the first magazine to feature the voyeuristic photos of Kate Middleton was a woman. These feminists never campaign when women letch over other women and view them as sex objects. There’s more sexual predation by lesbians than men per head of the population but they never speak of this. Attacking men is their only motivation. These feminists drown in the bile of their own hypocrisy. They also believe women are exploited by men.

In fact, men are exploited by women for children, money, power and status. There is probably more disrespectful, sexist behavior in society by women. A good example of their casual unwitting sexism revealed itself the BBC documentary Panorama, where an episode discussed sexism in football. Many of the comments on the program by women were deeply sexist, the sort of gender stereotypes men are chastised for. Phrases like “women are better communicators than men”, “women behave with less bravado”, “men are angry because we are taking their jobs.”

Unfortunately the irony seemed lost on them. Many women and girls watch football because they are sexually attracted to players, they have half naked posters of footballers on their walls but when men do this they are considered shallow and sexist. The hypocrisy is staggering sometimes. Let’s not forget how women exploit footballers and other well-known celebrities by seducing them in nightclubs and then sell stories to national newspapers. Maybe campaign groups like Object should visit a modern hen night or nightclub to observe women’s behavior.