Robert St Estephe is the Editor of a quite remarkable website, ‘The Unknown History of Feminism’ http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com. The site provides extensive and concrete proof that ‘herstory’ is nothing more than a pack of lies, invented to progress feminist agendas. Robert’s just posted a piece about an article written by Dorothy Dix in 1929 – 84 years ago. Dix was the ‘Oprah’ of the 1920s/30s.
http://www.avoiceformen.com/sexual-politics/m-g-t-o-w/mgtow-in-1929/
One evening recently I spent some time posting comments (polite, as always) on a blog piece by the militant feminist blogger, ‘Glosswitch’. The majority of my comments were published but later removed, which led to a bizarre comment thread, in which feminists criticise me for comments I’ve made, but most of those comments – some of them lengthy, with links to material, academic reports etc. – aren’t visible:
http://glosswatch.com/2013/07/17/raising-boys-during-a-crisis-of-masculinity-a-feminist-view/
It would seem that my comments got some feminist knickers in a twist, because Glosswitch is now moderating comments. In a new blog piece she attacks a journalist, Tim Lott (link below). From a quick run-through, it appears to be a long whine-fest about men not doing more domestic chores (or something like that):
http://glosswatch.com/2013/07/20/tim-lott-the-mens-rights-movements-very-own-polly-filler/
The comments, as usual, are windows through which we can glimpse bizarre feminist perspectives, and they’re occasionally entertaining. Here’s Rachael, a little ray of sunshine:
I am in a marriage that challenges my feminist principles on a regular basis. I do the majority of the childcare, domestic chores and cooking and am in paid employment on a part time basis. My husband works full time and takes time away to work. His contribution to the domestic environment is far less than mine.
Hmm. Let me address some comments to this hothouse orchid:
Rachael, you work part-time, your husband works full-time and takes time away to work… yet he contributes less than you to the ‘domestic environment’? Why, damn the evil patriarch!
Yesterday morning a male contributor, Sasha, added the following excellent comment. It’s yet to receive a reply from Glosswitch or any of her feminist stormtroopers, thereby lending support to one of my key theses. Feminists don’t like it up ‘em… they do not like it up ‘em!
“I’ve always felt very conflicted in reading any of these pieces in magazines where the writer uses their personal lives and relates the goings-on of their family and friends. I don’t think it’s exclusive to men mind, Lucy Mangan springs to mind as someone who writes in often painful detail about her husband (or used to, I’m not sure she’s around now). I’ve always found it a very exploitative approach.
I’d echo some of the other comments about Tim’s piece therefore in finding it more than a bit preachy and hypocritical in parts. The only point I’d add is that I believe it really goes with the territory of writing this kind of personal column, and is a sin committed by both men and women.
On the actual point about housework and the division of labour, I can only draw on my personal experience. My wife gave up work after the birth of our second child, not just because she wanted to look after the children, but because she no longer felt a vocation for her chosen career. [MB: Hmm… do some women do that after having children? Haha!] Shortly after that I found myself in the position of being the sole wage-earner for four dependents. I found this to be a pretty heavy strain and burden, particularly as the recession bit, and my job became subject to constant review. I found myself working longer hours, and at home I was frequently worried and stressed.
My wife’s response was to criticise me almost constantly – sometimes for up to four or five hours a night. She would constantly berate me for not helping with the housework, or picking the children up from school, despite this taking place during working hours. Our sex life was non-existent, she threatened me with a divorce when I had to go to London for the day, which conflicted with a social engagement that same night. She was cold, judgmental and told me she was ‘very, very angry’. Her days were spent having lunch with friends, doing yoga and studying part time to be a counsellor. She qualified in 2011, and on the day she qualified she told me she was taking the boys and moving to be near her parents. We’re currently finalising the divorce.
My soon-to-be-ex-wife regularly put me down for not being ‘stronger’, and any attempt at defence she would mock me for ‘trying to be the big man’. There have been many occasions in the past couple of years when I’ve felt suicidal, and I’m on the anti-depressant Citalopram for the duration.
My ex is a Cambridge-educated feminist, and I have to say that my marriage to her has been easily the worst experience of my life. It’s left me with deep and abiding concerns about both feminism and women generally. For whatever reason – and I don’t pretend to be an expert on feminism – it seems to me that feminism is incompatible with having a healthy, respectful relationship with men. [MB: Spot on, Sasha!]
If you’re going to believe that men have oppressed women for millennia, then you’re in a relationship with a man, and you suddenly realise that he has weaknesses and vulnerabilities, it seems to me the next step is to assume that this indicates he comes up short as a man, and then reject him.
I think many men understand this, and this is one reason why men like Tim Lott see one solution as maintaining ‘control’ or independence of finances. I split my net income after paying all the bills and expenses with my ex 50/50. I now see this as a colossal mistake, and in future I would not allow a woman to have any control or access to my finances at all.
It’s a shame that being in charge of a home is something that can be decried as ‘authority over dirty socks’ while earning money is praised as giving the ‘fundamental freedoms’ of ‘financial autonomy’. If I have to go to work, or my children don’t eat, then I’m not experience much ‘freedom’ – I don’t have a choice. In fact, all I have is a burden. My ex by contrast could decide to stay at home or work; this is a choice I don’t have. If I did, I’d have loved to stay at home. [MB: Sasha, good luck finding a woman willing to work hard to finance that choice.]
What concerns me is that so many women seem blind to the idea that men also can’t ‘have it all’. They don’t seem to see the colossal male suicide and mental health rates as being connected in any way to the pressure on men to provide for and enable the choices freely made by women.
I wish I knew what the answer is to these conundrums, but I have to say that I’m not optimistic. [MB: Sasha, the answer to these ‘conundrums’ is here: https://j4mbdotorgdotuk.wordpress.com and http://avoiceformen.com and http://youtube.com/manwomanmyth. We look forward to hearing from you.]”
My thanks to Chandrapal S Bhasker for tracking down this short (2:15) but priceless gem of a video. Perceptively, he comments, ‘Numbers are Patriarchal constructs. Mathematics is WAR ON WOMEN.’ Enjoy:
We’ve had a very positive response to our recent announcement that we’re working on proposals for abortion law reform. 98% of abortions in the UK are carried out on the grounds of potential threat to women’s mental health, which is effectively abortion on demand – NOT the declared intention of the original proponents of the Abortion Act (1967).
A recent newspaper article on the matter:
In our public consultation document we ask for suggestions for additional areas in which to have proposals for public consultation, which may in time appear in our 2015 general election manifesto. Abortion law reform is, by some distance, the leading additional area proposed by women.
An interesting article by Mark Trueblood:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/updates/cosmo-doesnt-support-domestic-violence-anymore/
A depressing piece in the Daily Mail:
How pathetic is this extract from the article?
Mr Cameron has faced criticism for his failure to promote women in the past, amid claims he left two female Cabinet ministers in tears when he sacked them in last September’s reshuffle.
Clearly female cabinet ministers, even those who’ve proved to be utterly incompetent, should never be sacked, lest they burst into tears.
The cabinet currently has 22 ministers:
https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers#cabinet-ministers
Four ministers are women, and only one, Theresa May, heads a major department:
Theresa May – Home Office
Justine Greening – International Development
Maria Miller – Culture, Media and Sport, Women and Equalities
Theresa Villiers – Northern Ireland
So, four female ministers in a cabinet of 22… 18.2%. There are 48 women among the Conservatives’ 304 MPs… 15.8%. So women are already over-represented in the cabinet, yet Dave wants to increase their over-representation further. What a truly spineless man he is.
Two months ago we posted a classic video from the leading men’s human rights advocate, Karen Straughan – ‘GirlWritesWhat’. I’m pleased to see AVfM has published a transcript of the video, along with a link to the video. Enjoy:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/sexual-politics/m-g-t-o-w/men-not-marrying/
My thanks to a number of supporters for telling me how much they enjoyed the last post, with respect both to Andy Thomas’s article and ‘Diary of a Radical Feminist’. Two people asked me if I had the URL of the ‘Diary’. Indeed I do, and here it is. Enjoy:
An excellent article by Andy Thomas, who leads the UK branch of ‘A Voice for Men’. The text is the transcript of the video content.
http://www.avoiceformen-uk.com/2013/07/mgtow-relationships-women-men-going-their-own-way.html
It’s good to see the website is serialising ‘Diary of a Radical Feminist’. The latest entry:
http://www.avoiceformen-uk.com/2013/07/diary-of-a-radfem-day7.html
An interesting case reported in the Daily Mail:
Even leaving aside the obvious point that a 22-year-old man who committed the same crime against a 14-year-old girl would have received a much longer prison sentence, there are some interesting aspects to this case. One is the relentless narrative of women not being responsible for their actions, as espoused by her defence counsel:
Ben Pegman, mitigating, said: ‘She has been in a relationship for six months and would take issue with the proposition she puts it before the court to avoid custody.
‘The sentencing guidelines greatly alarm her. She is of previous good character. I suspect the court will never see this lady again. My plea is to ask you to suspend any custodial sentence.
‘She now realises he didn’t have sufficient maturity, more than that, that it was unlawful. She simply hadn’t thought it through. It hadn’t gone through her head at the time.
‘Clearly, there is an acceptance from the defendant that her behaviour was wrong. As to how much insight she has got into that, I think, it is a moot point.’
Can you imagine a defence counsel saying of a man in this position, seeking to suspend a custodial sentence, ‘It hadn’t gone through his head at the time’? The defence counsel is clearly saying the woman was amoral, and should be treated leniently as a result.
The second interesting aspect is that the girl apparently became pregnant (by a new boyfriend) in the expectation of avoiding a custodial sentence, lending credence to the thesis that women play the ‘child card’ to avoid being punished in the same manner as men. To his credit, by jailing her, the judge didn’t respond as she expected he would:
Judge Bourne-Arton told her: ‘You knew perfectly well that which you were doing was wrong. I am quite sure it was you who carried out the initiative. There are worrying signs you have failed to completely appreciate what impact what you did has had on him… there are deeply worrying factors in your case.’
Justice for Men & Boys 