New Video - An Army Outside Their Door
The only "argument" they will ever pay attention to, is the demographic growth of those who oppose them. When they see an army camped outside their door, they will finally understand the wisdom of negotiating.
This video is a remake for the sake of higher production standards.
I should add, that the present state of historical reality is not "normal". As soon as we fix the currently existing monstrous inequities against men, we can all go back to being happily 'normal' again. But until that day, I'm afraid normality just ain't on the cards, folks!
And we can thank feminism for this.
posted by Fidelbogen at 10:15 PM
7 Comments:
Fidelbogen:
I'm glad that you raised the issue of 'normalcy'. One phrase (which I can't stand) recurring in the media is 'the new normal'. They use that phrase to condition society to accept something they don't want.
I had an interesting experience recently about the growing anti-feminist sentiment. Somebody had posted a link to a mainstream media relationship blog where the moderator actually broached the 'controversial' subject of male alienation in America. I was amazed to read how many male commenters, probably not MRAs, (at least I didn't recognize them) boldly voiced their discontentment with the state of American gender relations.
I believe that there really is an untapped anti-feminist undercurrent among American males. I've read that marriages to foreign-born women is the only American marriage demographic that's shown a consistent increase during the last 30 years.
It is good that you are positing the entire feminism concept, as a war.
They started it. Men will end it.
Keep up the good work.
Fidelbogen:
Speaking of the battlefront, Futrelle is finished yet foaming his outrage and playing the victim card over events in Vancouver. He actually said today that the debate you mentioned a few days ago was cancelled because of 'intimidation and threats' from MRAs. He snidely implied that MRA fear of being humiliated in a debate was the motive behind all this.
It's interesting that he never quotemines comments like the ones I mentioned above, that appear in mainstream media outlets.
I suppose it's all the 'Stasi Syndrome' at work...
As a fellow worker in the vineyard I am always intrigued and impressed by your analysis.
Of late I've taken to trolling around some mainstream sites posing as a true equity feminist (and occasional misandrist.) As such I am, in all honesty, an MRA in nearly everything but name (as an equity feminist that is.)
I still talk about all the issues facing men, but still claim to be a "feminist" and place all the blame for these issues on "The Patriarchy." LOL.
I've seen some interesting results that seem to hold some promise from a rhetorical and strategic standpoint (an interest we seem to share.)
I'm curious if you've considered this strategy much and what your thoughts are on it? (ie MRA's posing as feminists and, from an ostensibly "femninist" standpoint proselytizing on the rights of men or illustrating feminist bigotry.)
In this way I can actually advocate men's rights, but I can also, make absurd misandric statements that take feminist logic to its extremes and illustrate their absurdity (for example posting on an article highlighting a female child molester something like "If women ruled the world there'd be no wars." (And of course feminists actually believe this but have more sense than to say it in such a context normally.)
In case it's not clear, I should clarify that I actually do believe the feminist movement to be a hate movement -- the efforts and comments of some of its more earnest and honest adherents notwithstanding.
Best Regards,
Carlos
@Carlos:
I used to do something like you're describing, in my pre-blogging days. One of my occasional haunts was the "Feminista" blog, back when Trish Wilson was one of the editors there. I did the perfect parody of a radical feminist loon, and stayed at pretty much the same level as the commenters in general, but always managed to push the envelope just a TAD further. But not so much that it was obvious.
It sounds like you are describing something a tad bit different than what I was doing. Maybe a bit more complex and subtle. But it sounds like "good clean fun" in any case.
I honestly think it is easier to fool feminists with that game than it is (for feminists) to fool "our people". I think we are generally more intelligent and discerning than they are.
Also, I like the idea of posing as a "liberal" feminist, espousing "MRA" sentiments, and YET, in spite of all that. . .blaming it on the patriarchy.
I find that particular combination delicious!
** That's "Feminista" -- not to be confused with "Feministe".
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home