This Has Nothing to Do WIth Feminism . . . Right?

The following may tend to induce paranoia:

"Gang Stalking is a systemic form of control, which seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individuals life. Once a target is flagged a notification is sent out to the community at large, and the target is followed around 24/7 by the various communities that they are in.

"The community notifications will go out to various places. Apartment rentals, future employers, stores and communities where the target visits, will be notified. Doctors offices, fire departments, police, etc. A covert investigation might also be opened, and electronic, means used by the civilian spies/snitches as part of the overt and covert monitoring and surveillance process.

"Individuals can be flagged designating them as having a history of aggressive or inappropriate behavior. This notification system will follow the target if they move, change jobs, visit other areas. It lets the community believe that the target is a person who needs to be watched or monitored."

But read more in this vein -- in fact, a whole website's worth! :

http://gangstalkingworld.com/what-is-gang-stalking/

{~;

This Nicks 'Em!

Next time some feminist calls you a "rape apologist", look that horse's ass squarely in the eye and deliver the following handy-dandy, knock-em-dead mind discombobulator:

"No. Assuming that a rape really happened, I do not apologize."

More Evidence of What to Expect From SoCons

A commenter on the foregoing post had THIS to say:

"Fidelbogen, take a gander at this: http://tinyurl.com/2fxhvdj
I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts and observations. Perhaps you can post a comment at this site."

And I replied to the commenter as follows:

Anon 10:45, I thank you for the link. I went there and read the article, and I am not feeling very kindly toward the author of it. Here is the comment I left (which may not survive moderation) :

"I consider myself a member of that “men’s movement” which Thomas Fleming mentions in the present article.

"For the record, I take serious offense at Fleming’s snide, dismissive, arrogance in speaking of said movement. He clearly knows almost nothing about it, and as befits the ignorant, should be instructed to shut up.

"This reinforces the growing consensus among movement members, that social conservatives (such as Fleming) are as much the enemies of men as feminists are.

"It also taints my personal enjoyment of the article, and makes it hard for me to appreciate the author’s points on their own merit.

"Consider your knuckles smacked, Thomas! You are just plain MEAN, and you should behave yourself in the future!"

Yes, another lofty ignoramus with a diamond-shaped, felt-lined asshole who cannot or will not comprehend the magnitude of the crisis, who doesn't give a snap about men outside his sheltered cultural-social milieu, and probably thinks "it can't happen here."

Fittingly trenchant remarks at that website, by CF readers, are encouraged. Intelligent and classy, please!

Socialism and Feminism in History

I have not been posting much these days. I have been severely zonked, drained, void of motivation, and occupied with other things -- far more than is normal for me. And I am not amused. I do not find this charming. It is not because I have nothing to write about. No, it is because I have TOO MUCH to write about, and this generates a log-jam, a mental bottleneck crisis. I cannot focus on one thing long enough to build up a head of steam on that topic, before something else shoves it out of the way, only to be bumped away in its turn by the next thing, and the next and the next. And so none of it gets out of my brain. Yes, a bottleneck.

All right then. I will do the usual, namely, give you something to read which I did not write:

http://tinyurl.com/36hh7gs

This, unfortunately, is a graphic scan PDF, rather than a text version, so it is a heavy 9 megabytes! (I hate it when they do that!) But, I think it shall be worth your while.

As you will see, "history repeats itself", or " the more things change, the more they stay the same." This book chapter is titled "Marx, Engels and the Abolition of the Family", and it talks much about feminism, socialism, "free love" (can you say bonobos?), and. . well. . the abolition of the family.

That is to say, this material strikes a lot of chords which are as familiar nowadays as they were in the heyday of 19th century socialism. Not to say that those ideas originated in the 19th century, but that they first took on, at that time, a form we moderns and post-moderns can immediately recognize.

All in all, this material ties together a lot of things and throws a useful backlight upon our present historical foreground.

Incidentally, the material makes reference to Charles Fourier (1772-1837), the French utopian socialist. Fourier is without doubt a spiritual progenitor of today's "loony left". He had a motley array of tutti-frutti ideas about the ideal future world he hoped to create: for example, did you know that Charles Fourier wanted to perfume the Arctic Ocean?

Yup!

Golden Opportunity for Intellectual Plundering

Sage Journals Online, publisher of academic articles from many fields of study, is once more up for grabs. They periodically make this opportunity available, for promotional purposes. To discover what I am talking about, go HERE:

http://tinyurl.com/296yntg

Now, I don't know what your exact interests are, but you might want to dig around under such headings as "gender studies", "women's studies", "maculinities", "feminism", and "feminist criminology". You might be surprised at the high academic radical feminist "dirt" you will find. (Did you know that they "lens" people like us in criminological terms?)

Give it a go! You have until 15 Oct 2010 to snarf up as many PDF files as you can stuff on your hard drive, thumb drive, CD-rom, or whatever.

Remember that feminist academia is the primary wellspring from whence the poison flows. They make up their shit in obscure university departments, and from there they drip-feed it slowly, through various channels, into the culture at large. So, here is your chance to gather evidence of what's coming down the pike, or -- since you can get material from as far back as 1999 -- your chance to gather retrospective evidence of things that have already been fed into the culture.

Make like farmers, thresh that grain, and gather it into the silo.

MRA Attitude: It's Bustin' Out All Over!

It took me a while to discover this, but . . . discover I did!

Looks like our brothers in the continental Eurosphere are breaking new ground and pushing back new frontiers. Every revolution ought to have some good tunes, and here we see a start.

This guy sure does have a European accent, doesn't he? How sweet it is, to know we've got more than just Americans and mad-dog Englishmen in this game. . .eh?

Personally, I am looking forward to enjoying tons and tons of MRA PODCASTS in a rainbow of different accents. Come on guys, they're easy to produce, and easier to propagate than videos!

P.S. Here is the native YouTube environment for this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ORAz52X9DI&feature=player_embedded#!

A Message from David

David, who comments at the Spearhead, has left the following on the foregoing CF post. I invite all CF readers to surf over to the address which David supplies, and check it out, and do whatever seems right. In a day or two, when I am feeling chipper, I will look into it myself. Right now, I am not feeling chipper.

However, even without looking, I can offer one bit of speculation. Really, it is simple. I would ask the blogmaster over there WHY women should go through life expecting people to BUY things for them? Is that not the part of a small child, play such a role? Don't we all eventually (at least in theory) grow up, and live as adults, putting away childish ways and paying for stuff our own damn selves? And when somebody BUYS something for us, do we not consider that a gift, an uncoerced, exceptional act which happens just occasionally, and worthy of special gratitude precisely by reason of its specialness?

That, or somewhat to that effect, is what I would say over at the Stone Jars website. And I would cap it off by very nonchalantly asking the blogmaster if he considers himself a feminist, and upon what criteria or criterion he grounds his self-assessment.

Note what I am doing in all of the above: I am simply posing QUESTIONS.

But enough already. Here is David's comment:

"David said...

"Hi, everybody -

"Fidelbogen, I don't know whether you permit these sorts of comments on your blog. If you don't, I'm sure you'll let me know, and of course I will happily acquiesce. However I thought it was worth a shot.

"There is a little battle I'm fighting at a website called Six Stone Jars. It's a Catholic website about dating and it's the stomping ground of many a white knight, pedestalizer, mangina, and, of course, our good friend the testicle-crushing dominatrix. If you ask me, it's exactly where a militant MRA belongs. After all, the soldier best serves his purpose on the battlefield. Tell me I'm wrong.

"What may not be clear from a cursory scan of the site is that the author, though I would certainly consider him a good man, consistently takes men to task for various bad things we tend to do. By comparison he disciplines women very lightly - though he often praises their intrinsic value as women. None of these things, I would say, are bad in themselves; the problem, rather is what he does not do. By failing to take women to task as he does men, and by failing to praise men as fathers and husbands, Anthony Buono is subtly and unintentionally perpetuating the men/bad women/good meme. This is his crime against men.

"The topic of discussion today is whether men should pay the full bill on a date. Seems innocuous enough, right? Well, follow the below link and tell me whether anything troubles you:

http://www.6stonejars.com/index.cfm/2010/9/9/Men-pay-women-save

"The guy named "David" in the commentary is me. I am getting whipped by white knights and man-eating dominatrices. Their weapon is shaming language, inarticulate and irrational arguments their pretext. I could use some help. It's not that I think we will change minds, at least not completely. But I am easily dismissed while I fight alone. And what is the point of the MRM if not to guarantee no man fights alone?

"Help me, brothers.

"A final note - if you are interested in helping, bear in mind this is a chill, genteel Catholic website. The author moderates all comments. You will want to temper your language, refraining, as much as possible, from insults and curses. Otherwise your comments will simply not be posted. [I would recommend keeping a backup copy so you can share what you said, even if it doesn't survive moderation! -Fidelbogen]

"Do help me out. I would do the same for you."

8:57 PM

Topicals and Timelies

I am in receipt of the following e-mail, from a sender who is both female and not a feminist:

-----Original Message-----
From: ------------------------
To: * fidelbogen
Sent: Wed, Sep 8, 2010 7:32 pm
Subject: In what way(s) is it true?

On one of the threads on Spearhead forum Venom said: "The spearhead's kind of been on a decline ever since Globalman got banned. Women are being allowed to make to many decisions about the direction of the spearhead."I was wondering, since I don't think I've been on there long enough to know, what he would mean by this statement, and the reason I'm asking you (and not just responding to the thread) is because I know the rest of the guys who were posting on that thread are all categorical women haters and I just want an honest answer without all of the ensuing male/female crap (which I know you would provide if you are able).

My response to the above is, I think, of significance to warrant broader exposure:

I rarely look into the Spearhead forum; can you give me a link to the location you are talking about?

Anyhow, without knowing anything further at this stage, I would have to say that Globalman was an abrasive character, but quite knowledgeable. His misfortune was that he could not present his knowledge effectively (diplomatically). He knew quite a bit, but he acted like a know-it-all . . . and of course, NOBODY knows it all! Plus. . . he said some things that were politically very, very ill-considered. Personally, I think it is just as well that he got sacked. . .

As for "Venom": The name says it all! I would assume he is a Globalman fan. So of course, to HIM the Spearhead is going downhill now! And I have no idea what he means about women making too many decisions -- possibly because the tone is a bit less "misogynistic" now? What he and people like him don't seem to understand, is how to set uncompromising male boundaries without being woman-haters, or how to say HARD THINGS without sounding unnecessarily harsh. Yes. . it can be done, but some people need to pull a printout from the clue wire.

Since my brain is clicking, here are some extra goodies for you . . .

The difference between feminism and the MRM? Well. . . both groups contain a number of "haters", but only feminism is a hate movement per se. That is, if you kicked out all of the hate and all of the haters from feminism, the movement as such would cease to exist, having nothing to hold it together or drive it forward. On the other hand, if you expelled the hate element from the MRM, the movement as such would roll right along and never skip a beat. It would still have ample reason to exist as long as such a thing as feminism existed.

Finally, I ought to point out something that I haven't pointed out nearly enough. The so-called MRM is just one piece of a larger picture, and that "larger picture" is what I call the non-feminist revolution. There are a number of individuals, groups and forces of various sorts and sizes which are converging to attack feminism, or its extended power structure, or its objective consequences in whatever form. Not all of these entities are "men's" forces, and not all of them even realize that they are attacking feminism per se. But, they are all of them like roads leading to Rome, and they are all pinching feminism in one way or another.

In the end, the non-feminist revolution is nothing more or less than the rest of the world, exclusive of feminism, acting in a more-or-less political way against feminism and its objective consequences, and with a growing awareness of itself AS A FORCE.

Yet the MRM will always be at the center of this, for the simple reason that the War on Men is at the center of everything that feminism does.

Hopefully this was helpful;

~F~

Phenomenal!

Some time ago, I produced an MP3 podcast called Redstockings Manifesto - Part 3.

The download traffic for this audio file has been stunning! Dizzying! Breathtaking!

At latest count (about 15 minutes ago), the total number of downloads was 86. Last week, the total was 82, so . . . it looks to be creeping steadily up and up.

I have no idea why this particular podcast is so abnormally popular, but evidently I have 'struck a nerve'. The product, it would seem, has value -- as market behavior has attested!

So, on the theory that this product would hold similar value for an even broader public (who would find it valuable for the identical mysterious reasons), I will boost exposure by publishing the download link again, as follows:

http://www.4shared.com/audio/VrhhRkfM/CP13.html?

Maybe now it will break the 100 mark?

--------------------------------
Postscript: The text of the Redstockings Manifesto (which the podcast talks about) can be seen here: http://tinyurl.com/27bdgfm