Our thanks to Mike P for this. Compulsory paternity testing at birth would surely have dissuaded the woman from committing this crime.
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
From Fidelbogen
If the non-feminist sector is to begin existing politically, its partisans must assert non-feminist authority at appropriate times. Among other things, this will involve a code of conduct enforced upon feminists themselves. Such action will set a moral barrier in the path of feminist aggression, and begin to erode feminism’s intellectual hegemony in public and private conversation.
The following protocols are written in a voice which specially addresses the feminist sector:
Preamble
A cultural change of the guard is under way, with a new order of social and moral authority coming into focus. This development is nascent, but already the shape of the future is evident to discerning eyes. We can no longer pretend that feminist ideology speaks with sole authority about the human condition. New voices must and will be heard. Furthermore, co-existence between the feminist sector and the non-feminist sector must be initialized.
Beginning in the year 2018 a code of conduct will be enacted, and all who consider themselves feminist will be encouraged to abide by this code. The code, in the form of six protocols, runs as follows:
First Protocol: Respect non-feminist alterity
Non-feminist alterity means the essential, unassimilable “otherness” of the non-feminist sector in relation to the feminist sector. The world beyond feminism is a sovereign thing, a transcendent thing, morally and intellectually independent of all feminist control and all feminist theorization about the nature of reality. Feminism is not the world, nor entitled to rule the world. It follows that non-feminist people are not bound to treat feminism with unquestioning deference or servility. It is fitting that feminists, in their conversation with us, or in their public communication about matters of a political nature which concern us, will abide by certain terms. These terms are partly laid out in the present protocols. Violation of any of the protocols is, ipso facto, a violation of the first protocol.
Second Protocol: Self-disclose when addressing the non- feminist sector
Feminism is not the world, so it follows that not everybody you meet is feminist. In communications of a political tenor you must acknowledge this early in the talk, by expressly declaring your position as feminist. By that simple courtesy, you let non-feminist people know where they stand in relation to you, so they can properly orient themselves in the discussion.
You are not to assume that your feminism is self-evident. You are to announce it forthrightly, in set terms. It is arrogant and underhanded to omit this.
The self-disclosure protocol applies not only to individuals in private conversation but to all who would address the public in matters that bear upon so-called gender politics. This would include authors, journalists and public speakers. It would also include organizations operating under color of feminism in any way. These latter should make the point unmistakably clear at the head of their websites and publicity materials by stating “we are a feminist organization” or words to that effect.
You are not to carry on obliviously or cavalierly as if the non-feminist sector did not exist, or as if feminist discourse was a lingua franca. By your act of self-disclosure you nip any such tendency in the bud, because you acknowledge non-feminist alterity by implication. You signal your awareness of the difference and you set the communicative process on a footing of diplomatic equality.
Third Protocol: Do not assign group membership to the non-feminist individual
The non-feminist sector is not a collective of any kind but simply a demographic container encompassing a large majority of the human race. Every non-feminist man or woman you meet is an individual marked by many traits, only one of which is lack of feminism. They might share certain other traits with certain other people who lack feminism, or they might not. You are not to presume anything.
The individual non-feminist, who is merely one person, is patently not a “group” or “movement”. Furthermore, they are not a member of any such thing unless they clearly tell you so. You will bear this in mind throughout your engagement with that person, and voice no such assumption. If you mentally entertain such an assumption, you will keep it private.
Fourth Protocol: Do not make the non-feminist individual the subject of discussion
Unless your non-feminist interlocutor informs you otherwise, he or she is there to talk about issues and ideas. Do not make the conversation about them, personally, in any way. You must address issues and ideas in the spirit which your interlocutor proffers, on the terms which they have laid out. If they wish to talk about themselves they will make this clear, so wait for your cue.
Remember that the person you are talking to is not feminist, hence, not bound by the feminist axiom that “the personal is political”. Their politics and their personality shall not be intermingled in the realm of discussion. Further, it should go without saying, in the spirit of this protocol, that the ad hominem argument fallacy is prohibited. That includes not simply attacking the other person, but making the argument about them, in any way at all – even a seemingly benign or friendly way.
Fifth Protocol: Do not pretend that women and feminism are the same thing
Feminism is an ideology, while female is a biological demographic. The difference between ideology and biology ought to be self-evident. Furthermore, it ought to be clear that not all women are feminist. You will learn to accept that graciously.
The majority of women are not feminist. Calling yourself “the women’s movement” thousands of times over the years will not alter this. Extorting women’s gratitude by commandeering their name is a poor strategy that will backfire. Using women as a moral shield against anybody who opposes feminism will also backfire. We call that “hiding behind women”, and it is cowardly. If you do such things, you discredit yourself and forfeit the right to be taken seriously.
Sixth Protocol: Do not monopolize the meaning of the word “feminism”
As a feminist, your definition of feminism is simply a local meaning that you share with other feminists. Non-feminist people often mean something very different when they say “feminism” or “feminist”, and you as a feminist must allow for this. You must not assume that your local meaning operates beyond your locality and you must not construe non-feminist words or arguments on the basis of any such assumption.
Similarly, you must make no character imputation about your non- feminist interlocutor on the basis of any such assumption. So if feminism signifies certain laudable things in your mind, it does not follow that the non-feminist rejects those things. In fact, one or both of the following are likely possibilities: that he or she does not consider those things to be part of feminism, or that he or she rejects feminism for a different reason, unrelated to those things.
If you are speaking or writing for the general public, you must also bear this protocol in mind. A large part of your audience will rate you poorly if you don’t.
Conclusion
No non-feminist man or woman owes you any conversation at all, so don’t come to them making demands or demanding answers. The right of the non-feminist sector to exist is not in question, nor is the right of non- feminist people to go about their lives unmolested. If they find feminism problematic for any reason, they will speak up audibly and publicly about this, and you will not hinder them.
As an individual feminist, you are representing for all other feminists. Violation of these protocols will reflect negatively upon both you the individual feminist, and upon the feminist collective. If therefore you comport yourself undiplomatically, you are putting all other feminists, to some degree, under a cloud.
We shall expect all feminists to abide by these protocols and to exert peer pressure, among themselves, to that end. To flout these protocols, to ignore them, to treat them flippantly or derisively, will sink feminism under the accumulating weight of non-feminist judgment.
Understand, that nuances have been pretermitted from this document in the interest of brevity. Therefore, consider these protocols not the last word, but the first of many.
Published under Creative Commons 3.0
This document may be non-commercially distributed at will
provided the text is not altered and author attribution is retained.
It’s expected that videos of the Chicago conference presentations (and more, e.g. panel discussions) will be published on YouTube in late October, and we’ll have links to all of them. The highly-regarded videographer The Glass Blind Spot has just published this (video, 1:11:21). It’s all highly watchable, but I thought I’d point to the three extracts from the talk given by Philip Davies MP. They’re at:
22:48 – 24:01
48:43 – 52:50
1:02:05 – 1:03:36
In the third extract, Philip reveals two important amendments he plans to propose during the next reading of the Domestic Abuse Bill. We wish him every success.
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
Our thanks to Guttorm Grundt, a Norwegian man and a speaker at ICMI16, for this. Speakers include Warren Farrell and Karen Straughan, and the conference is free to attend.
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
Just received:
Hi Everybody,
Exciting news this week – I am the first Australian contributor on Jordan Peterson’s new platform, thinkspot! I’ve been invited to be part of the first group of ten or so contributors Jordan has invited to start the platform.
It is supposed to be up and running by Sept 30. There’s over 250,000 people registered to join the site and they will be allowed access in batches from around that time. If you join up now using “Bettina” as a promo code, it will help ensure you have earlier entry. You don’t need to pay to come on board but there will be subscriptions available for various extra tiers providing access to greater involvement by readers – such as Q&A sessions.
Thinkspot is designed as a platform for promoting the free exchange of ideas and in-depth discussion – particularly of topics which are being silenced in our current repressive culture. As I have explained before, YouTube has effectively killed my channel by hiding all my videos and refusing to allow me advertising, which provided most of the revenue I was receiving – no doubt driven by ongoing feminist campaign against me. So, thinkspot is hugely important for me and many others who are currently being censored. See one of their first promotion images, below.
We are currently in the process of transferring my videos and a bunch of other material to the site. It’s looking pretty interesting with features designed for serious interaction with readers, where I will participate in discussions about my ideas. Unlike the smart-arse comments which dominate much of current social media, thinkspot is imposing a minimal 50 word limit on comments, to encourage more thoughtful discourse. It will be interesting to see how this works out.
I’ll be revealing more in weeks to come. Let’s see how mainstream media reacts to this development. No doubt it will be greeted by sneers from the usual suspects, including the ABC, but I am hopeful the publicity will alert more people to what I am trying to do.
Sexist, misogynist pile of crap
Next week I’m also giving the next talk in my campus tour – At UNSW in Sydney, Tues 24 Sept, 6.00 pm at the Red Centre Theatre on Kensington campus.
It will be interesting because so much has happened in the last few months with the French inquiry into free speech on campuses leading to the universities eventually signing up to free speech codes. UNSW will have a chance to parade their support for free speech if they handle this well but it looks like they will be put to the test with major protests apparently being planned.
Have a look at this charming creature. This is Caitlin Keogh, Women’s Officer at UNSW – pictured here abusing me at my Sydney Uni protest. You can see her in action here.
Keogh travelled to Sydney University to abuse me when I spoke there last year. You can imagine she’s not very happy to have me speaking at her own university, UNSW, next week. I am told activists from other universities will be joining her organisation next Tues to protest my talk
The Butterfield Effect
Many of my younger readers will know the great Australian comedian, Isaac Butterfield who has attracted over 1 mill YouTube subscriber through his crude, rude and very funny videos. Isaac has just started a new podcast, The Butterfield Effect, featuring long, in-depth interviews and I was the first person to appear on the show.
We’ve put together a short video featuring some highlights from this lengthy interview here – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujuDPxn929k
And if you enjoy this brief taste you can listen to the podcast or watch the whole interview here. It’s great seeing all the positive comments from people who know nothing about my work.
That’s it for now. Cheers, Tina
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
Impressive (video, 24:09). A feature of Bloodstained Men protests is the number of female intactivists. It would be great to see more women supporting us in our campaigning at Speakers’ Corner and elsewhere.
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
Earlier today I posted a link to the latest Varsity piece relating to our talks at Cambridge University. My thanks to Sue for going to the trouble of opening the link to the associated crowdfunder, to pay the £150 sums due to the three recipients of milkshake on their clothes.
The piece includes the ridiculous allegation that J4MB tried to doxx the two blithering idiots involved in throwing the milkshake and photographing it, as well as protesters from the Cambridge University Noisy Twats Society. There are a number of references to “comrades”. The piece ends with this:
Any extra funds we receive will be donated to the Cambridge Disorientation Guide, which furthers left wing activism in the city and university.
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
Tim Goldich is an American, and the president of the Chicago chapter of National Coalition for Men. He spoke at ICMI19, and he’s just published this.
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
I’m posting this blog piece because on 6 October, 2019, we’re going to continue campaigning against MGM, Male Genital Mutilation – non-therapeutic male circumcision – at Speakers’ Corner, London, this time wearing white workwear with red patches over the groin, in common with the inspiring American group Bloodstained Men & Their Friends. We’ll be handing out new leaflets, and displaying new placards. There will be links to this blog piece on both leaflets and placards, people interested in our message will readily find links here to information about MGM. A unifying theme of the new campaign will be:
If you love your son and understand the harm always caused by circumcision, you wouldn’t have him circumcised.
Our collection of materials about MGM is enormous, and it’s difficult to do it justice in one blog piece, but I’ll try:
An introduction to MGM
William Collins, a British man, is the most important blogger on gender-related issues in the world, at his website The Illustrated Empathy Gap. His first article on MGM is here. His book The Empathy Gap: Male Disadvantages and the Mechanisms of Their Neglect was published in June 2019, and it’s a tour de force. The section on MGM alone is 50 pages long.
Religious reasons for carrying out MGM
The two religions which most commonly perform MGM on male minors are Judaism and Islam (Christians from parts of Africa also perform it). It’s common in the United States for cultural reasons, as explored in the film American Circumcision, which is free to watch on Netflix and Amazon Prime. The most powerful religious arguments against MGM come from Jews and Muslims themselves. The Jewish case against MGM is here. The Muslim case against MGM is here.
What injuries does MGM cause?
The foreskin performs close to 20 functions, and over 90% of the Meissner’s corpuscles in the penis – the nerve cells which provide pleasure to men during sex – are found in the foreskin, and are therefore discarded during the procedure. For a more detailed review of circumcision harms we recommend a presentation by Tim Hammond, an American campaigner against MGM, Findings of 2012 Global Survey of Infant Circumcision Harm.
Does MGM deliver health / medical benefits?
At Speakers’ Corner and elsewhere, we find circumcised men – Muslim men in particular – convinced there are health / medical benefits from MGM. We refer people who believe there are benefits, to three pieces written by William Collins – Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.
Video and audio pieces about MGM
Our playlist of 100+ audio and video pieces on MGM is here.
The legal position on MGM in the UK
Performing MGM in the UK is a crime under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, being at least Actual Bodily Harm, and almost certainly Grievous Bodily Harm. However, the criminal justice system, to its eternal shame, declines to bring prosecutions against the criminals performing the procedure. It also stops people bringing private prosecutions of individual circumcisers.
Psychological denial
It is understandable that circumcised men are resistant to the evidence showing they’ve been injured (always physically, sometimes psychologically) by the procedure. Religions and cultures brainwash circumcised men into thinking the procedure has been beneficial for them, so naturally they have their own sons circumcised in turn. We believe that the damaging procedure will stop when enough men and women are better informed about the damage caused by MGM, such that they will refuse to have their own sons circiumcised.
Ethical considerations
There is a huge body of literature concerning the ethics of MGM. Virtually all of it points to the practice being unethical, in part because mutilation of the genitals is carried out on a minor unable to understand the operation – there cannot be informed consent – and in part because the individual may later reject the religion of his parents, and maybe adopt a different religion. One of the most outspoken ethicists is Brian D Earp of the University of Oxford. One of his earlier papers, from 2014, was Female genital mutilation (FGM) and male circumcision: should there be a separate ethical discourse?”.
Our protests at Speakers’ Corner, London
Every second Sunday we campaign against MGM at Speakers’ Corner, please join us. Details here.
Bloostained Men and Their Friends
The American group Bloodstained Men & Their Friends engage in street protests against MGM. An example of their campaigning, in Denver, Colorado, is here (video, 24:09). A feature of their protests is the number of female protesters.
Known Genital Mutilators
A Voice for Men is a website run since 2009 by Paul Elam, a renowned American Men’s Rights Advocate (MRA). Gary Costanza is his organization’s Director of Anti-MGM Activism. He runs the website Neonatal Cutting and maintains a directory of Known Genital Mutilators (KGMs). Many of the people exposed as KGMs are British, all of whom are criminals, because carrying out MGM is a crime against the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
Questions on MGM? Seeking further information?
Please feel free to contact me (mike@j4mb.org.uk, 07967 026163) if you wish to discuss MGM or any of the many other men’s issues about which we’re concerned.
Our YouTube channel is here.
If everyone who read this gave us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. £5.00 monthly would entitle you to Bronze party membership, details here. Benefits include a dedicated and signed book by Mike Buchanan. Click below to make a difference. Thanks.
Justice for Men & Boys 