Sunday, July 31, 2011

What is a Male Renaissance Agitator?

"An MRA could be described as a person who affirms, unequivocally, that men as a group have objective political interests distinct from women as a group, and that feminism has been instrumental in generating this state of affairs."

31 July, 2011

Friday, July 29, 2011

A Quick Job for the Commentariat

If you have nothing better to do at the moment, why not nip over to the fluff-feminist website The Frisky, and have a gander at the following post-and-thread -- which concerns the Catherine Kieu Becker case:

And while you are there, you might want to leave a few choice sentiments, wherever appropriate, in a disciplined tone of acid politesse. ;)

Postscript: I take back the part about "fluff-feminist". It's really just fluff.

This Says What Needs Saying

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Vulgar Hatchet Job Against Fathers

Go and read the following column in The Telegraph (UK). This pertains to the recent Norway massacre. I don't know if the author, Katherine Birbalsingh, considers herself a feminist, but her sentiments chime right along with the party line:

Anders Breivik's Father Has a Lot to Answer For

The best part of this is the comment thread, where a clear majority of the readers are roasting KB's arse good and proper. Here is a choice sample from a commenter signing as 'Verfugbarkite':
"Domineering mother, creating a self absorbed avoidant male. Father left this mother, then worried by the welfare of son, tried to, and failed to get custody. Father fell out with son when aged 16, feeling that son was repsonsible for his own actions at that age, and there was no more he could do. Son continued to have his avoident personality disorder reinforced by his mother, who sheltered him, but told him he was "special and destined for great things". Son reading too much fantasy literature, with too much time on his hands (and drugs) develops more and more dangerous fantasies.

"Anyone can knock up some pycho-horseshit, I did that in 4 minutes (so excuse the spelling errors). "
And that's all I've got to say about this, but do get over there and pay special attention to the comments.

From Apollo's Lyre

Molto Affetuoso!

Saturday, July 23, 2011

You Go, Bro!

But wait, here's more:

Courtesy of our friend The Scarecrow: if you are sickened by Sharon Osbourne et al victimising, on national television, an innocent man who was brutally mutilated,* then please do the following:

1. Go to this site:

2. Click on "Broadcast (TV and Radio), Cable, and Satellite Issues"

3. Click NEXT

4. Click on "Broadcast programs showing obscene, profane, and/or indecent material"

5. Click NEXT

6. Click on "Complete the form" in the "Online Form - Recommended Method" box.

You will now see a form.

7. Fill in all information. Below is all the information about the show.

(1) Date of Program (use MM/DD/YYYY format): 07/14/2011
(2) Time of Program (use HH:MM AM/PM format): 1:00 PM PACIFIC and CENTRAL, 2:00 PM EASTERN
(3) Network: CBS
(4) Call Sign, Channel OR Frequency of the station on which you viewed/heard the material: For me, it was 2.1

(5) City and State Where Program Was Viewed/Heard: (Your city and state)
(6) Name of Program or DJ/Personality/Song/Film: The Talk

In the edit box at the bottom express yourself, here is something similar to what I wrote:

I found the episode of "The Talk" that aired on CBS on July 14, 2011 to be extremely offensive. The hostesses of the show were laughing at a man who had been sexually mutilated.

Just as it is inappropriate to air animals being mutilated willfully by a human being, I think it is more inappropriate to air jokes about actual human beings getting willfully mutilated by others.

The jovial attitude from the hostesses on the show "The Talk" was grossly offensive and obscene.

Nobody would be allowed to joke about animals being willfully maimed and crippled, the women on CBS should not be allowed to make light of a man being maimed and crippled.

8. Click on the SUBMIT button.


Friday, July 22, 2011

The False Accusation Industry. That's Right -- Industry!

Here I go again with another reminder of why we fight, and what we fight. Sometimes I feel like I am pointing to one pebble after another, hoping to prove the reality of a catastrophic landslide to a pack of moral imbeciles who remind me every time that "it's just one little pebble, what's your problem dude?" When I say moral imbeciles, I am of course referring to feminists and their fatuous, fatheaded supporters. I am NOT referring to the noble non-feminist readers of this blog, and above all I am NOT referring you fine newcomers who are just now opening your eyes and making rapid progress in comprehending the state of things.

Very well then, the following is from the latest post on George Rolph's blog, Just A Man Writing:
"What you are about to read is a tale of horror, fear, violence and calculated evil aided and abetted by a system, set up in the UK, to reward liars and man-haters with cash for telling lies and destroying the lives of men. A system that pays large sums of money to women who lie and pays them BEFORE any trial ever takes place. (See the final four paragraphs of this story.) This amounts to a bounty placed upon false allegations where there has been no evidence of a crime. There is no other word that fits a system that can do this except evil and it is an evil that will persist as long as YOU do nothing about it."
You can read the entire harrowing narrative here:

After that, will some feminist please get in here and tell me that yes, men have a few problems but these pale in comparison to women's problems. And don't forget to explain why we should be working WITH feminism and not attacking it.

Meanwhile, I and others will continue to execute the sentence against feminism, which is: Death By a Thousand Cuts.

New Video - Pedophilia Hysteria

Thursday, July 21, 2011

"Copycat" Crime: Did Catherine Kieu Take Her Cue From Sharon Osbourne?

I don't have much to say, and I don't need to say much. After all, some things speak for themselves. About a month ago Sharon Osbourne, of recent notoriety, made the following statement:
"I would have chopped his willy (penis) off. Arnie’s willy would have been down the disposal unit spinning around, that’s where it’d be – and I’d make her clean it up. That mop would have been wrapped around her head."
The "Arnie" she refers to, is Arnold Schwarzenegger. The "her" is Mildred Baena, Schwarzenegger's ill-starred housekeeper.

Is it too much too suggest, that Catherine Kieu Becker got the idea for her recent crime from Sharon Osbourne?

I also wonder what Sharon Osbourne was thinking when she made this earlier statement. Did she have the Lorena Bobbitt case in mind, and was she speculatively voicing her suggestions on how to "do it right this time"?

But here is an entire article on the subject of Sharon Osborne and what she said a month ago. The title of the article is:

Sharon Osbourne Would ‘Chop’ Schwarzenegger’s Penis Off

. . . AND toss it down the In-sink-erator! Just like Catherine Kieu did do her husband's appendage a short time later.

So, here is a link for the article:

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Some Hard Words

This video is worth watching two or three times, in connection with my previous post. The narrator certainly pulls no punches. And he is spot on the money when he informs us that certain forms of male violence are predictable. . . and bound to happen more and more in the present social climate. Feminism made this happen, and more feminism will only pour more petrol on the flames.

That aside, I should add that it is urgently important for non-feminist women to awaken to the crisis and make their voices loudly heard. If there is perhaps a flaw in the female psyche, as the video suggests, then we need to hear from as many "alternative" female voices as possible, in order to know that the situation as a whole is not beyond redemption.

And if you haven't read the classic False Rape Society article on the Lorena Bobbitt case, it's high time that you did:

Feminists: Stick THIS in Your Garbage Disposal Mind and Chew On It!!

Sit back and savor this lovely YouTube video. It looks like I was at least a little bit wrong; things haven't changed so much since the Bobbitt case after all. Well, all right, the response is more muted in general -- but the same attitude is present, simmering a very short distance below the surface.

While you are watching the video and enjoying the jolly, clever, scintillating banter of these women, do bear in mind that these are NOT radical feminist weirdos -- they are bright, (superficially) attractive regular gals from the middleclass mainstream. So, for the sake of calibration, I'd also like to hear what the radical feminist weirdos are saying.

Anyhow, having witnessed this, I could not in good faith and good conscience object to the proceedings if some dudes on a talk show acted similarly about a story where a man did a kitchen knife cliterodectomy on his wife.

It's all about symmetry and proportionality. If such be permitted for the goose, it is permissible for the gander. At least in theory.

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

This Is How We Reindoctrinate VAWA -- Read It!

I have blogged elsewhere about the proposed Partner Violence Reduction Act. This legislation cleanly guts all   "feminism" out of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), and leaves us with a non-sexist, non-ideological, male-friendly, gender-ethical document to which I would gladly co-sign.

So, I share with you now a 46-page PDF which catalogues, item by item, all of the proposed changes to the text of VAWA. You will find the material arranged in tabular form, with the separate items listed in the left column, and reasons for the alterations given in the right. I have read all 46 pages, and it makes me very happy to see such work being done.

To download your own copy -- which I strongly urge you to do -- click on the funny little graphic image below. Go ahead. . . give it a click! ;)

Saturday, July 16, 2011

New Video -- The Battle for Feminism's Soul

Thursday, July 14, 2011

Marc Rudov Punks a Feminist

His rhetorical discipline is excellent, too! :)

Notice also, at the very end of the segment, where the "feminist" brazenly confirms what we have long known: that "patriarchy" is simply a feminist codeword for male power of any kind. I mean, she makes it plain as day that she wants to get rid of "patriarchy" and (male) supremacy, in order to arrive finally at "a woman's nation". She states that it would be her preference.

We define feminism as "female supremacism." The terms are completely interchangeable in every way, and don't let anybody tell you otherwise.

Posted Less Than Five Minutes Ago

The following comment, which conforms to disciplined rhetorical standards, was posted by me less than five minutes ago on Hugo Schwyzer's blog. I am unfortunately not able to do a screenshot:
  1. Fidelbogen

    What Hugo and “Jill” did to “Ted” was paternity fraud. Full stop.

    If present legal codes do not quite codify the nuances presented in this story (do they?) then they would need to be updated appropriately.

    Nobody, but nobody, should be knowingly deceived into parenting a child which is not biologically his own.

    And failure to take a paternity test, in this case, was an omission tantamount to deceit.

    Ted ought to get some remuneration if the child is not his.

    [Your comment is awaiting moderation.]

Note that the final sentence is not of my own authorship, and that the outcome awaits.

Read the pertaining Schwyzer post and thread here:


My comment got through moderation. A few items down the thread from it, a certain "Scolopendra" posted the following:


You have convinced me. The MRAs are right and feminists are wrong.

I didn’t want to believe it.

People who don’t see that Ted was wronged are dehumanizing him. One might even say they’re objectifying him.

And in reply to Scolopendra, I posted this:


“You have convinced me. The MRAs are right and feminists are wrong.”

Scolopendra, I congratulate you for this “crack of dawn” epiphany that you have just experienced. I hope that you will not roll over and go back to sleep, but get up, go outside, and embrace the growing light of a new day.

[Your comment is awaiting moderation.]

Again, the outcome awaits. ;)

Matt O'Connor Goes on a Hunger Strike

Matt O'Connor, one of the main men of the activist organization Fathers4Justice, has been a figure of controversy over the years. I have personally chatted with a couple of former F4J members who had some harsh thoughts about him. But never mind all that; he is doing good work now. Does anybody remember John Murtari, the "MRA Gandhi"? Well, Matt O'Connor too is putting himself on a starvation diet. He has planted himself in front of Prime Minister David Cameron's house in Oxfordshire, where he plans not to budge an inch or eat a bite until his message sinks in. . . somehow.

Whatever you might think about O'Connor's current exploit, there is no denying it will draw the world's gaze and raise the profile of the issues. Starving yourself is a VERY dramatic gesture --mind you, not in the same league with burning yourself, but it can carry your point very effectively. I'm sure that O'Connor (reputedly a marketing/publicity genius) will know how to milk this game for every drop it is worth. He appears to have a well-equipped support team, that's for sure! All in all, he seems to have his act together.

But here, go and read all about it in the Belfast Telegraph:

The Partner Violence Reduction Act -- or "How to Fix VAWA"

The Partner Violence Reduction Act, now being introduced into Congress, would accomplish the following:

1. Give first priority to real victims and reduce false allegations by constraining definitions and distinguishing between an allegation and a judicial finding of domestic violence.
2. Make the law gender-inclusive and removes discriminatory policies.
3. Seek to protect and restore families when the abuse is minor.
4. Remove harmful mandatory arrest, predominant aggressor, and no-drop prosecution policies, thus helping to restore due process.
5. Allow legal assistance to be provided both to the alleged victim and alleged offender.
6. Improve the accountability of domestic violence organizations.
7. Curb immigration fraud.
8. Remove provisions that violate the Constitution and restore civil rights to the accused.

This would undo the evil which feminism has inflicted on the world -- for the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was from first to last a feminist project, blessed by Andrea Dworkin herself, who famously remarked that "the senators do not understand the meaning of the legislation which they pass."

Do any of you feminists out there have anything to say for yourselves?

Go here to see about contacting your representative politicians:

Lorena Bobbit Redux

Consider the following:
"Orange County prosecutors charged a Garden Grove woman Wednesday with two felony counts for allegedly cutting off her husband’s penis and throwing it in a garbage disposal after drugging him and tying him to a bed."
Sounds like she had the Bobbitt case in mind, and didn't want to repeat Lorena's "mistake" of leaving the severed organ intact! But here is the news article we are discussing, in its entirety:

Will this story get the huge, worldwide notoriety which the Bobbitt case received? No, I reckon it won't. For that would immediately force the Bobbitt case back into our collective mind, and invite comparative discussions of a politically loaded nature which plenty of people would rather not see happening. The zeitgeist has changed a LOT since the Bobbitt case . . . and the men' s rights movement has had a lot to do with creating that change.

Oh sure, the feminists would love to crow and gloat about the present case, and whip out their attitude, and wave it around as brazenly as they did back then. But they know damned well that this time around they had better "put that thing away and zip it up" because the zeitgeist won't tolerate such public obscenity any more.

Any of you feminists want to sound off about this, right here?

Monday, July 11, 2011

Another Quick Thought

I will step onto some thin ice here, in taking a small risk that I'll sound like a "wimp" or something of that kind.

All right. I believe it is important to engage feminists in a non-abrasive way, and to genuinely LISTEN to them. That may be impossible to do with the radical haters, but with the mainstream foot-soldiers it is quite easy. When they start spouting off their ill-formed opinions about "MRAs" and whatnot, you should switch into Disengage Mode, and engage them in that mode.

Suspend your personal feelings about what they are saying. And forget about debating or explaining. Just take a hint from Socrates, and commence to asking them questions in order to draw them into clarificatory statements. They might actually say something inculpatory -- you never know -- but that is not what you seek. What you seek, rather, is to know their actual thinking, with all possible precision, from their 0wn subjective vantage point.

To put that more cleverly, you should go about to gain objective information about their subjectivity.

In such manner, by repeated experiment, we chart the psychic topography of the enemy. Yes, good maps are vitally important for successful campaigns. There is no substitute for a correct definition of the situation in all of its its dimensions.

Learning the mind of the enemy in this manner will give you a great power boost in the practice of rhetorical discipline, teaching you precisely how NOT to fall afoul of their prejudices. This will help you to craft your message to the best possible effect, so that you cut off all their avenues of escape from the realization of what you are saying, thus driving them into a corner in their own minds and bottling them up in a way that neutralizes their effectuality.

Therefore, be a good listener! After all, the feminists love to remind us that "men don't listen", so I say it is time to lay that stereotype to rest.

The Feminists Had Better Learn That

Snark has recently posted an article well worth reading, and I offer, below, a juicy slab from this:
"The idea that a certain biologically distinct group of people has 'privilege' over another like group, is one that exists only within a metanarrative that I do not believe to be reliable, and thus, that I do not follow.

"I.e. the idea of 'male privilege' makes sense only within the narrative that feminism has constructed.

"(A metanarrative which, conveniently, suggests its own remedy to the problem it has diagnosed.)

"So, as for 'checking my privilege' - well, this would only make sense if I believed in the feminist metanarrative, by which asking people to check their privilege is a sensible thing to do - no?

"But, given that I put no stock in this metanarrative whatsoever ... asking me to 'check my privilege' is nonsensical; an absurdity!

"It is like telling me to 'go fish', when I am not holding any cards.

"It is like telling me that you have just taken my knight, when I am not playing chess.

"Talk of holding 'privilege' that I should 'check' ... fails to exert any sway over my actions whatsoever.

"When will feminists come to realise that they are not the world? That the world existed for a long time prior to them; that the world will continue to exist once they are gone; and that the world exists in a state of non-feminism at present!

"Feminism exists within the world; it is not the world. And without the presence of this piece of the world known as feminism, the world would still be here, and we would still understand it."

Yes, feminism is not the world.

And furthermore:

The world does not owe feminism a living.

Anyhow, go here to read Snark's entire post:

By the way, I would point to this piece as an absolute gem of rhetorical discipline. Let Snark show you how it's done!

Friday, July 08, 2011

New Video - How to Use the Redstockings Manifesto

The Marxist-inspired Redstockings Manifesto, published in New York City in 1969, is the best compendium of feminism's core principles that you will find anywhere. If you are confused by the welter of conflicting definitions, just spend time studying Redstockings and analyzing the historical developments of the last half-century, and you will become aware of the striking patterns and paralells between what is written in this document, and what the various forms of feminism have imposed upon the world.

This is as close to "the Real Feminism" as you're ever going to find. And the present video briefly outlines a few ways to put it to practical use.

Read the Redstockings Manifesto online, here:

And archive a personal copy! ;)

Thursday, July 07, 2011

Feeeel The Testosterone!

Yes, I felt like tapping into the energy of the higher spheres again, as I do occasionally.

Here is the distillation, in musical terms, of that evil Patriarchy which feminism seeks to destroy. Relish the male power and control, and get yourself in the groove. This drives away feminists as garlic drives away vampires!

Also, note the "phallic" architecture in the picture. Feminists hate that sort of thing too! ;)

Wednesday, July 06, 2011

New Video - The Ontology of
Female Supremacism

Monday, July 04, 2011

For A Bit O' Fun!

Here is an article on an Australian journalistic website called "The Punch". It is basically about the DSK case, but you'll want to have a read of the lively comment thread, and maybe weigh in too! I've posted three or four comments myself:

Oh yes. . . our side has the upper hand. But it would be nice to see some reinforcements arriving, to turn it into a rout! ;)

Feminist Theory 101 -- Straight From Womanspace!

I say, don't you just love it when your enemies damn themselves out of their very own solipsistic little mouths? I thank Snark for posting the following, and I am echoing it here in order to generate amplification. The more this gets amplified, the more it will travel and the more widely it will become known about -- and I find it good, that such a goody as this should travel far and become widely known about. Be sure to share this with any budding non-feminists you might know, in order to precipitate their political awakening. Maybe some feminist will get in here and explain why such statements as this are "not really feminism" :

President of Men's Party in Switzerland Recieves Death Threats

The following article, viewed here by the grace of Google translation from the original French, offers a good little snapshot of what is happening in the world beyond the Anglosphere:

Selections from the article:
"We currently have about 5000 members throughout Switzerland, including Romandie, where we will open an office in Geneva. This is proof that we have a cause to defend, that of men. In this regard, I should point out that 30% of our members are women who understand that we stand above all the fate of family members."

"[...] every time we held meetings based on anti-feminism, I received anonymous death threats and my house was sprayed with paint. But every time the media reported these facts, we have increased our membership by the hundreds."
Mark this well. As the non-feminist revolution in its many aspects continues to gain ground, the underlying criminal nature of the feminist social organism will be forced more and more into the open.

Saturday, July 02, 2011

Binaural Beats

These-here audio mind-tools are just the ticket for some of you hotheaded "MRA types", so you can get yourselves into a grooved out, transcended brainwave state. You know, so y'all can be more effectively cutting-edge in this WAR we are fighting! ;)

Friday, July 01, 2011

Even the Devil Gets Presumption of Innocence