There are many, many, many reasons why the Men’s Rights movement is not now, and I suspect never will be, ready for prime time. One of these reasons is that even when MRAs are doing their best to wax eloquent, in the fanciest language they can muster, about the urgent need for men to save civilization from the degradations of feminism and cultural Marxism and whatever by saying even more bad things about women, they just can’t keep themselves from using phrases like “pussy pass.”
Case in point, this little mini-manifesto, taken from a recent post by “BC Dad” on The Spearhead with the almost Maoist title “On The Urgent Necessity of Criticizing Women.” (As usual, I have edited out some of the redundancies because, holy crap, these guys are long-winded.) Take it away, Daddy-o:
Accurate, pointed and realistic public criticism of female behavior is thus long overdue; co-operation with the pussy pass, cultural Marxism and the politically correct goal of equal outcomes renders the female of our species free to continue and escalate her destructive, irrational and abusive behavior without hindrance.
Well, even aside from “pussy pass,” THAT was quite an exhausting sentence now, wasn’t it. Let’s catch our breath for a moment before continuing.
Rather than obligating women to raise their intellectual, ethical and behavioral standards, society has chosen instead to embrace, with all the religious fervor of an Inquisition, a false image of reality – shiny happy victims holding hands with government – which in the long term can benefit no one. This allegiance to the false idols of feminism has led directly, since the 1970’s in particular, to the loss of basic human rights and freedoms … a loss which impacts men most profoundly.
Are you sitting down? Good. Because Dad here is about to use the phrase “evolutionary value of the pussy pass.” No, really:
Looking past the obvious evolutionary value of the pussy pass, there is little purpose in cooperating with and maintaining the fraud, and to do so will lead inexorably, in this era of virtually omnipotent governance and bureaucracy (the ‘new patriarchy,’ created, just like the old one, for women at their own behest), to the ever-escalating abuse of men and children, up to and including the potential for societal collapse.
Yes, he did just say that the “old patriarchy” was set up by women and for the benefit of women. And that there’s a new woman-centric-patriarchy that’s been set up in the same way. Apparently on The Spearhead, these delusions are so widely shared that BC Dad feels comfortable referring to them in a parenthetical aside, assuming that none of his readers will stop short and say,”woah, daddy-o, what the hell are you talking about there? I mean, I hate the ladies too but I’m pretty sure they’re not the ones making sure all the popes are dudes.”
This path will undoubtedly see the regression of society into a quasi-Victorian state, one in which the bulk of men are so heavily constrained and alienated that they lose all desire to participate in the social venture. Signs of such a zeitgeist can be seen in many countries already.
Absolutely. Take a look at this
photolithograph of some quasi-Victorian ruffians in contemporary, er, Switzerland, clearly alienated from society and taking refuge in silly hats and walking sticks and the growing of oversized sideburns.
BC Dad continues:
As well, if the escalation of destructive female behavior continues, blowback from young men in particular will be increasingly prevalent, whereby outright disdain for females becomes both a descriptor of and a motivator for the new generation of men: there are numerous blogs out there which speak clearly to this possibility, as many people are aware.
And now we come to the predictable “you ladies better watch out before you get what’s coming to you” portion of the manifesto.
The obvious contempt towards women displayed by certain commentators would seem to be well-earned, and it does not bode well for females.
Humanity will undoubtedly survive, though with much unnecessary suffering, but it is incumbent upon rational men (and women) to speak truth, to expose the great gender lie. In addition to refusing compliance with a false reality, this most definitely includes pointing the accusatory fingers of reason and culpability directly at women, a task which can no longer be shirked.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure the accusatory fingers of blaminess have been pointed directly at women pretty much since cave dudes figured out how to point their fingers in the first place.
Naturally, the Spearhead’s commenters lapped this all up happily — and took the argument a few steps further.
“IMO, ensuring the extinction of this warped and rotting society is THE most mature and responsible action today’s western male can take,” GT66 argued.
TFH, for his part, seemed to suggest that some sort of authoritarian “solution” was the inevitable next step:
Extreme feminism is inseparable from democracy.
Women use the right to vote to warp entire societies to make everything secondary to the whims of women, and to divert all resources to women and all costs to men and children.
Democracy ends as a result, one way or the other.
Ulick McGee, meanwhile, delivered up a manifesto of his own, which included such highlights as:
The most basic problem is the sexual free market. Male Demand for casual sex is unlimited and women control Supply. ….
We can’t beat the current pro-female, anti-male system through logical argument or political action, just like Communists could not get the “exploited” worker to rise up in the West. Thirsty Simps will never stop pedestalings sluts. The Elites won’t stop the party. Young women won’t start lusting over nice guys. Human Nature in the absence of nuclear incentives to the contrary will continue the current trend of Dykeland Uber Alles.
There’s a bunch more to Mr. McGee’s manifesto. Most of it makes even less sense than that.
Darryl X, not to be outdone in the manifestoing department, delivered up a 29-point program, which included the following news updates from Planet MRA:
FEMINISM IS THE PRIMARY MECHANISM BY WHICH WORKING MEN ARE ENSLAVED, RESPONSIBLE MEN ARE IMPOVERISHED, INNOCENT MEN ARE IMPRISONED, INFIRM MEN ARE DENIED HEALTH CARE, POTENTIAL SCHOLARS ARE DENIED EDUCATIONS, PERSECUTED MEN ARE DENIED PASSPORTS AND FREE MEN ARE KILLED
1/29 States, family courts and their officers, representatives of the Divorce Industry, feminists and others encourage mothers and other women to make false allegations of domestic violence, rape and child abuse against men and then divorce them …
17/29 Because of child support and Title IX and other developments, men have no incentive to pursue and are precluded from educations and the ratio of men to women at university presently approximates 2:3 …
21/29 Women get paid more and consume approximately 85% of resources as concluded by many marketing and government studies and men are sent to die in endless wars to satisfy that excessive consumption
22/29 The government wants women fighting in combat because it knows they can be more easily manipulated than men to kill their own citizens and even men in their own ranks (just look at how good the government has been at destroying families and fathers and children by paying mothers, other women and feminists to do it) …
24/29 The feminist police state metastasizes, men are without incentive to work and are actually punished for it, women don’t work despite excessive entitlements, our infrastructure falls apart, and the economy collapses
25/29 Our government doesn’t just fail to compensate men for their labor but actively punishes them while it doesn’t just fail to punish women for egregious criminal behavior but actively rewards them
26/29 Any economic recovery is nothing but the involuntary sacrifice of the lives of men and the transfer of their wealth to women and feminists in exchange for absolute power and control which corrupts absolutely …
28/29 Women have always been the most privileged population in the US
29/29 Feminism is a hate movement which can be stopped only by force
Huh. So I guess some Spearheaders have a little trouble telling the difference between “criticizing” women and “threatening” them.