The Counter-Feminist: A Retrospective Round-Up
Today is 18 October, 2010. Four years and 3 days ago, I published the very first post on this blog. All right, so I missed the correct anniversary date by a few days! But yes, I have been plugging away at this job for four years now. It is scary, how quickly time flies. And I really do mean that: it scares me!
And I am tired. These past few weeks, I've been nearly unable to write anything at all. I find, nowadays, that I would much rather read than write; much rather think than talk; much rather take in than put out. A half-formed sensation has gotten hold of me: that it's time for a change, time for a fresh start, time to branch out in a new direction -- although I'm not a bit clear on what that new direction ought to be!
So, I reckon I'll keep doing what I'm doing, eh?
But I thought it would marshal my thinking, and be helpful to my readers also, if I took a nice long backward glance over the last four years and summarized most of what I have been saying, or trying to say, during that time. I did not start this blog in order to vent -- although it has certainly given me a chance to do so! But no, I started this blog in order to expound an integrated system of thought, a philosophical worldview, a theoretical foundation for practical worldly action against feminism. Along the road, I have dabbled in activism a little bit, but I have been true to my original plan for the entire time. And I have said not all, but a considerable lot, of what I set out to say -- although, admittedly, I feel like I haven't said it well enough!
At any rate, I will now share a series of links to earlier posts, in addition to some files for download. I would like to leave my readers -- especially the more recent arrivals -- with a clear (if somewhat sketchy) idea of the philosophical structure which underlies this style of thinking called "counter-feminism". I know that you haven't all read everything on the blog, so a lot of what I am now sharing will be new stuff for a lot of readers. Along with the links, I will give a capsule summary of the main ideas I have formulated since October 2006, and try to show how these ideas flow together into an organic unity.
First, a crafty little parable -- or allegory if you will. It paints in miniature the folly, the vanity, the wickedness and even the underlying criminality of our enemy. And it offers the shade of a hint on how we ought to deal with the matters confronting us:
The House on the Hill
Next, I lay down the rules of the road for my own journey, and I lay down the law for any feminist who reads it. And I will expect any feminist who presumes to criticize me to have read it -- and not knowing about it, is no excuse! You know what they say about ignorance of the law:
The Seven Point Counter-Feminist Platform
Next, I link you to the most famous and celebrated thing I have ever published on this blog. It was the proverbial shot heard 'round the world, a bombshell that sent overnight shockwaves rippling from one end of the MRM to the other. It was something bold and new, a kind of writing that was scarcely known among MRAs in early 2007! And it contains, in embryonic form, about two-thirds of the main ideas that were fleshed-out in later blog entries -- for example, the principle of perpetual revolution, and the irrelevance of "morality" as a criterion of validation or invalidation for the so-called men's movement. The title says it was written for feminists, but to be honest I think I really had MRAs in mind, as an audience, when I wrote this:
For Feminist Readers: An Introduction to the Men's Movement
Next, I link you to the very first post on the blog, from 15 October, 2006. This essay is foundational in a critically important way, because it peels the poison artichoke of feminism straight down to the core, and paves the road for the pivotal realization that feminism EQUALS female supremacism:
Is Feminism a Hate Movement?
Next: there are many different feminisms -- as the feminists themselves love to remind us! And yet, these many different feminisms all belong to the same elephant. A blind man would overlook this: Feminism's Occult Unity of Purpose
Next, one of my signally enduring contributions to the intellectual culture of the MRM. The principle that "patriarchy" is a feminist codeword for "male power of any kind" is quite deeply embedded in MRA discourse now; it crops up in discussions everywhere:
When Feminists talk about "Patriarchy", they mean Male Power
From early on, it was clear to me that the word 'feminism' did not offer an adequate grip upon the serpentine complexities we were struggling with. It had long been clear to me that feminism was in fact an organism, a sociopolitical aggregate of parts and operations that blended gradually into the surrounding world. Simply put, I felt there was "more to feminism than feminism", and I was finally able to distill this feeling into words, in an essay that also explains both the role of female supremacism and the need to assert a non-feminist 'will-to-power': What is the 'Femplex'?
The following lays out the rudiments of counter-feminist analysis -- that feminism is a system of restless energy which obtains sustenance and furtherance by expanding endlessly into the surrounding world, and by generating revolutionary change. Feminism is like a weather phenomenon which exists only because it is in motion. We call this motion perpetual revolution. If you block perpetual revolution, feminism will die:
Counter-feminism Operates from a Specialized Analysis
In the below-linked podcast (the first of fifteen to date), I asserted the futility of modifying feminist behavior through any form of debate or appeal to reason. I argued that the only thing the feminists will respond to, is a tangible worldly threat to their entrenched position of advantage. I then outlined a few modest suggestions on how to get things moving in the right direction:
Feminism Will not Yield to Argument Alone
The next post, not to mince words, talks about putting feminism out of business without its permission -- and that's "pragmatic", all right! When you realize the futility of debating or arguing with these people, such a modus operandus follows logically enough:
Counter-Feminism is Pragmatic in its Manner of Operation
Counter-feminist analysis is like a Greek Chorus, commenting on and forecasting things. Given certain conditions, certain trends are likely to continue, leading to certain outcomes. Don't say nobody warned you. We cannot, in good conscience, do other than issue these bulletins. Prediction is not prescription, so don't shoot the messenger:
Counter-Feminism Makes Predictions. Prediction is not Prescription!
You have heard it said that feminism operates on the principle of man equals bad and woman equals good. The following scalps the duff down to the bedrock:
The Manichean Ontology of Female Supremacism
From a web forum: 136 pages of conversation about Female Supremacy, and the (projected) future of men in society. Most of the women believe in the "natural superiority of women", and think that women have a natural right to dominate men. A lot of the men AGREE, and look forward to this. Download this in PDF format, here:
Female Supremacism Straight From the Horse's Ass
Now we come to an item which is easily among the top five in terms of ideological importance -- if not necessarily crowd appeal. The following essay sets forth an elegantly simple idea which nothing prior to April 2008 had foreshadowed, namely, the idea of dividing the entire world into a feminist and a non-feminist zone of existence, and framing the entire opposition to feminism in terms of the resulting schematic duality. We call this efficient political worldview the Sector System.
The beauty of the Sector System is, that it puts feminism unalterably on the defensive while it frees the opposition from any need to "answer for" itself, in merely moralistic terms, as an official movement or ideology might be required to do. As an individual, you need only declare yourself "non-feminist" and walk away from any feminist conversation which you find annoying -- they may not importune you or interrogate you further!
The Sector System also generates a foundational space that will permit counter-feminist energy to constitute itself in a diversity of forms transcending the so-called "men's movement".
In the process of developing the sector thesis, I had occasion to introduce the vitally important doctrine of feminist subjectivism, which will ultimately empower us to flip the script altogether and place feminism, as an ideology and as a movement, under moral siege:
The Sector System: An Efficient Political Worldview
Next, an essay which burrows further into feminism's guts, depositing metal-shavings and shards of broken glass along the way. The vitally important doctrine of feminist subjectivism is further developed here, and the closely related concept of feminist triumphalism is introduced. The essay concludes by sketching the memetic strategy of distributed questions, and finally informing feminism that it had better learn to "co-exist".
Is Feminism a Good Thing? It is an Object for the World!
The following podcast examines the crisis of the age which feminism created when it politicized relations between men and women, and turned men into second-class citizens. The unhealthy outcome is, that "women are on their own", and men have no special duty to "go to bat" for women's personal or political interests:
The Two-Party System of Sexual Politics
The following PDF tract builds upon the points established in the preceding podcast, and develops a full-fledged theory of the state and the social contract. Step-by-step, the tract explains why the state and the entire culture have been contaminated by the feminist worldview, and why any possible social contract involving men has been nullified. The sobering conclusion is, that you as a man owe no political obligation to women, and that the only valid locus of moral sovereignty is a moral law within yourself. Granted, the implications of this are not uniformly pretty, but then . . . I am only the messenger:
The State and the Social Contract under the Feminist Regime
And below, a duo of podcasts, both on the same theme. The battle for feminism's soul, referred to in their titles, signifies the battle to take away feminism's control over its own narrative, and so to effect the fatal rupture of feminist subjectivism, followed by feminism's sociopolitical "loss of innocence". The core strategy of this campaign, is to expose female supremacism as identical with feminism's "soul":
The Battle for Feminism's Soul - Part 1
The Battle for Feminism's Soul - Part 2
Wrapping up the round-up now, I send you to a rather recent post with a very simple, yet intriguing, title. This essay explains how feminism's failure to hold women to any meaningful standard of moral accountability can serve as a "bright line test" to establish a conceptual, and eventually sociopolitical, demarcation between the feminist sector and the non-feminist sector:
The Bright Line
All right. Considering that this blog contains over five-hundred posts, you haven't seen much. But you have seen most of the best, or I should say, you have seen most of the most critically important items of the lot. So this does more than scratch the surface; this plows a pretty decent furrow upon it! But still, it's only a furrow.
I'm sure that all of this material will keep you busy reading for quite a while, which means I won't need to update the blog for quite a while. Enjoy! ;~)
And I am tired. These past few weeks, I've been nearly unable to write anything at all. I find, nowadays, that I would much rather read than write; much rather think than talk; much rather take in than put out. A half-formed sensation has gotten hold of me: that it's time for a change, time for a fresh start, time to branch out in a new direction -- although I'm not a bit clear on what that new direction ought to be!
So, I reckon I'll keep doing what I'm doing, eh?
But I thought it would marshal my thinking, and be helpful to my readers also, if I took a nice long backward glance over the last four years and summarized most of what I have been saying, or trying to say, during that time. I did not start this blog in order to vent -- although it has certainly given me a chance to do so! But no, I started this blog in order to expound an integrated system of thought, a philosophical worldview, a theoretical foundation for practical worldly action against feminism. Along the road, I have dabbled in activism a little bit, but I have been true to my original plan for the entire time. And I have said not all, but a considerable lot, of what I set out to say -- although, admittedly, I feel like I haven't said it well enough!
At any rate, I will now share a series of links to earlier posts, in addition to some files for download. I would like to leave my readers -- especially the more recent arrivals -- with a clear (if somewhat sketchy) idea of the philosophical structure which underlies this style of thinking called "counter-feminism". I know that you haven't all read everything on the blog, so a lot of what I am now sharing will be new stuff for a lot of readers. Along with the links, I will give a capsule summary of the main ideas I have formulated since October 2006, and try to show how these ideas flow together into an organic unity.
First, a crafty little parable -- or allegory if you will. It paints in miniature the folly, the vanity, the wickedness and even the underlying criminality of our enemy. And it offers the shade of a hint on how we ought to deal with the matters confronting us:
The House on the Hill
Next, I lay down the rules of the road for my own journey, and I lay down the law for any feminist who reads it. And I will expect any feminist who presumes to criticize me to have read it -- and not knowing about it, is no excuse! You know what they say about ignorance of the law:
The Seven Point Counter-Feminist Platform
Next, I link you to the most famous and celebrated thing I have ever published on this blog. It was the proverbial shot heard 'round the world, a bombshell that sent overnight shockwaves rippling from one end of the MRM to the other. It was something bold and new, a kind of writing that was scarcely known among MRAs in early 2007! And it contains, in embryonic form, about two-thirds of the main ideas that were fleshed-out in later blog entries -- for example, the principle of perpetual revolution, and the irrelevance of "morality" as a criterion of validation or invalidation for the so-called men's movement. The title says it was written for feminists, but to be honest I think I really had MRAs in mind, as an audience, when I wrote this:
For Feminist Readers: An Introduction to the Men's Movement
Next, I link you to the very first post on the blog, from 15 October, 2006. This essay is foundational in a critically important way, because it peels the poison artichoke of feminism straight down to the core, and paves the road for the pivotal realization that feminism EQUALS female supremacism:
Is Feminism a Hate Movement?
Next: there are many different feminisms -- as the feminists themselves love to remind us! And yet, these many different feminisms all belong to the same elephant. A blind man would overlook this: Feminism's Occult Unity of Purpose
Next, one of my signally enduring contributions to the intellectual culture of the MRM. The principle that "patriarchy" is a feminist codeword for "male power of any kind" is quite deeply embedded in MRA discourse now; it crops up in discussions everywhere:
When Feminists talk about "Patriarchy", they mean Male Power
From early on, it was clear to me that the word 'feminism' did not offer an adequate grip upon the serpentine complexities we were struggling with. It had long been clear to me that feminism was in fact an organism, a sociopolitical aggregate of parts and operations that blended gradually into the surrounding world. Simply put, I felt there was "more to feminism than feminism", and I was finally able to distill this feeling into words, in an essay that also explains both the role of female supremacism and the need to assert a non-feminist 'will-to-power': What is the 'Femplex'?
The following lays out the rudiments of counter-feminist analysis -- that feminism is a system of restless energy which obtains sustenance and furtherance by expanding endlessly into the surrounding world, and by generating revolutionary change. Feminism is like a weather phenomenon which exists only because it is in motion. We call this motion perpetual revolution. If you block perpetual revolution, feminism will die:
Counter-feminism Operates from a Specialized Analysis
In the below-linked podcast (the first of fifteen to date), I asserted the futility of modifying feminist behavior through any form of debate or appeal to reason. I argued that the only thing the feminists will respond to, is a tangible worldly threat to their entrenched position of advantage. I then outlined a few modest suggestions on how to get things moving in the right direction:
Feminism Will not Yield to Argument Alone
The next post, not to mince words, talks about putting feminism out of business without its permission -- and that's "pragmatic", all right! When you realize the futility of debating or arguing with these people, such a modus operandus follows logically enough:
Counter-Feminism is Pragmatic in its Manner of Operation
Counter-feminist analysis is like a Greek Chorus, commenting on and forecasting things. Given certain conditions, certain trends are likely to continue, leading to certain outcomes. Don't say nobody warned you. We cannot, in good conscience, do other than issue these bulletins. Prediction is not prescription, so don't shoot the messenger:
Counter-Feminism Makes Predictions. Prediction is not Prescription!
You have heard it said that feminism operates on the principle of man equals bad and woman equals good. The following scalps the duff down to the bedrock:
The Manichean Ontology of Female Supremacism
From a web forum: 136 pages of conversation about Female Supremacy, and the (projected) future of men in society. Most of the women believe in the "natural superiority of women", and think that women have a natural right to dominate men. A lot of the men AGREE, and look forward to this. Download this in PDF format, here:
Female Supremacism Straight From the Horse's Ass
Now we come to an item which is easily among the top five in terms of ideological importance -- if not necessarily crowd appeal. The following essay sets forth an elegantly simple idea which nothing prior to April 2008 had foreshadowed, namely, the idea of dividing the entire world into a feminist and a non-feminist zone of existence, and framing the entire opposition to feminism in terms of the resulting schematic duality. We call this efficient political worldview the Sector System.
The beauty of the Sector System is, that it puts feminism unalterably on the defensive while it frees the opposition from any need to "answer for" itself, in merely moralistic terms, as an official movement or ideology might be required to do. As an individual, you need only declare yourself "non-feminist" and walk away from any feminist conversation which you find annoying -- they may not importune you or interrogate you further!
The Sector System also generates a foundational space that will permit counter-feminist energy to constitute itself in a diversity of forms transcending the so-called "men's movement".
In the process of developing the sector thesis, I had occasion to introduce the vitally important doctrine of feminist subjectivism, which will ultimately empower us to flip the script altogether and place feminism, as an ideology and as a movement, under moral siege:
The Sector System: An Efficient Political Worldview
Next, an essay which burrows further into feminism's guts, depositing metal-shavings and shards of broken glass along the way. The vitally important doctrine of feminist subjectivism is further developed here, and the closely related concept of feminist triumphalism is introduced. The essay concludes by sketching the memetic strategy of distributed questions, and finally informing feminism that it had better learn to "co-exist".
Is Feminism a Good Thing? It is an Object for the World!
The following podcast examines the crisis of the age which feminism created when it politicized relations between men and women, and turned men into second-class citizens. The unhealthy outcome is, that "women are on their own", and men have no special duty to "go to bat" for women's personal or political interests:
The Two-Party System of Sexual Politics
The following PDF tract builds upon the points established in the preceding podcast, and develops a full-fledged theory of the state and the social contract. Step-by-step, the tract explains why the state and the entire culture have been contaminated by the feminist worldview, and why any possible social contract involving men has been nullified. The sobering conclusion is, that you as a man owe no political obligation to women, and that the only valid locus of moral sovereignty is a moral law within yourself. Granted, the implications of this are not uniformly pretty, but then . . . I am only the messenger:
The State and the Social Contract under the Feminist Regime
And below, a duo of podcasts, both on the same theme. The battle for feminism's soul, referred to in their titles, signifies the battle to take away feminism's control over its own narrative, and so to effect the fatal rupture of feminist subjectivism, followed by feminism's sociopolitical "loss of innocence". The core strategy of this campaign, is to expose female supremacism as identical with feminism's "soul":
The Battle for Feminism's Soul - Part 1
The Battle for Feminism's Soul - Part 2
Wrapping up the round-up now, I send you to a rather recent post with a very simple, yet intriguing, title. This essay explains how feminism's failure to hold women to any meaningful standard of moral accountability can serve as a "bright line test" to establish a conceptual, and eventually sociopolitical, demarcation between the feminist sector and the non-feminist sector:
The Bright Line
All right. Considering that this blog contains over five-hundred posts, you haven't seen much. But you have seen most of the best, or I should say, you have seen most of the most critically important items of the lot. So this does more than scratch the surface; this plows a pretty decent furrow upon it! But still, it's only a furrow.
I'm sure that all of this material will keep you busy reading for quite a while, which means I won't need to update the blog for quite a while. Enjoy! ;~)
posted by Fidelbogen at 7:41 PM
6 Comments:
I bow to you sir. This is why, I think you are one of the most needed people in the counter feminist movement. Your depth of thought, and ability to articulate that thought, is truly impressive.
Thank you, for all that you do.
ESB, I thank you!
Among others, I'll have to read your post on Feminism's patriarchy that you linked in. ;) Did you ever think that after four years faithfully plugging away, maybe you are just burnt out? If you do end up taking a writing sabbatical, I hope it won't be permanent!
A request:
If you do decide to stop blogging, please don't delete this blog. What you have posted here could still be valuable even if you are not adding to it any more.
I have seen several other related blogs just disappear.
@Anon:
Fear not. There is no way in hell I'm gonna shut the blog down.
For the moment, I'm just tired. I need to stare at the wall and catch my breath for a while.
So for a while, I'll be blogging in slo-mo, until I catch my second wind.
Excellent work Fidelbogen. You have served men-and women-well.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home