n important pro-male meeting is scheduled to be held in London in early Autumn of this year:
"Male sexual violation through the life cycle" -- A one day conference exploring the psychological impacts of sexual violence against men and boys -- Saturday 29th September, 11am -4.30pm (registration from 10.30am)
And here is a link to more information:
Anything that is pro-male is against feminism.
That much is axiomatic
. So even if activities like this don't attack feminism by name, they do serve to undermine and subvert it in a very powerful way, for which we can be thankful. In terms of the big picture, this conference is as much "activism" as a street demonstration would be, as petitioning or lobbying would be, as composing reader comments would be, as writing agitational blog posts would be, as publishing YouTube videos would be, as running a domestic violence refuge for men would be, and so on. All of the listed items may be described as actions trending toward a common outcome, and insofar, we consider them activistic
in the broad sense of the word.
Feminism, as a social organism, sucks energy from the world in many ways, and counter-feminist action works to block this at precisely the relevant points. That is true whether you are working to help men, with no reference to feminism by name, or working to damage feminism by name, with no reference to men. Either way, it's all one and it's all good.
If you are a feminist, you might be saying "but. . . but. . . what about the women?"
And my answer would be: "Yes, what ABOUT the women? I'm talking about
the men now. We'll talk about the women some other time!"
Since the aim of feminism, consciously or not, is to damage men, then it is quite in order to damage feminism if you care about men. And if you believe that to attack feminism is to attack women, then you should consider the likely repercussions that feminism's attack on men will ultimately
have on women, and ask yourself if it is really so bad for women after all, to attack feminism.
But again, if you are a feminist, you might take offense at my words about feminism and insist that I don't really know what feminism is. And my answer would be: "Ahhh...so we have a difference of opinion! Well guess whose opinion I value?"
Then I would instruct you to get back in the feminist clubhouse with the other feminists and tell each other whatever you needed to tell each other.
All right, so the upcoming Male Sexual Violation Conference, in London, is good for men because it seeks answers to men's problems in life. That alone puts it at odds with feminism, because if such answers are found then men will end up stronger and freer -- or in a word, more empowered.
And that would run flat contrary to the aims of feminism, wouldn't it?
But wait, there is even more to like about the upcoming conference. One of the conferees is a woman named Zoe Loderick, and I give you her descriptive blurb below:
"Zoe Loderick - Discussing
her experience of working with male survivors of sexual violence in a
socio-political environment that is dominated by a belief that rape is a
gendered crime. Exploring her observations and implications for men's
Ahhh....did you catch that? But of course you did! We know good and well that feminism is directly to blame for the idea that "rape is a gendered crime"
, and we know the evil consequences for men which this idea has spawned. So the scheduled London conference doesn't just talk about men's problems in general. It talks about a very specific
problem which feminism itself has specifically created
-- and in so doing, it puts a critically important piece of feminist ideology under the knife.
Now THAT is what I call attacking feminism! I would also call it a sign of the times, but that's another story.
Very well. They are doing good work for men and against feminism, over there in London, just as I am doing good work for men and against feminism right here at my computer. I, and those people in London, are parts of a globally distributed karmic machine which is closing in upon the femplex
from all sides. We are all, in our several ways, "activists". Our joint venture is not the so-called "men's rights movement", but something far bigger which hasn't quite got a proper name yet. However, I have chosen to call it the non-feminist revolution*,
because I think that phrase suits it to a 'T'.
To my fellow workers in the vineyard, all the best!
*Giving credit where it is due, I cannot claim paternity for the phrase "non-feminist revolution". In fact, this nomenclature first sprang from the keyboard of the non-feminist blogger Davout
, who typed it during an online conversation we had about 4 years ago.