$MONEY$ antifeminism antifeminst women douchebaggery hypocrisy lying liars manginas misogyny MRA oppressed white men PUA racism

Manosphere dudes: Let’s set up fake feminist blogs to take down feminism!

On the internet, no one knows you're a dog disguised as a cat.

Over on the always repugnant In Mala Fide, a guest blogger by the name of What is To Be Done recently offered his comrades in the “anti-establishment / man/ biorealist / HBD/ reactionary / racist / patriarch / tradcon / whatever blogosphere” what he evidently sees as a revolutionary suggestion: instead of trying to fight the evil feminists with “well-reasoned arguments,” why not simply set up fake feminist blogs, and post shit on them to make feminists looks bad?

WITBD explained:

On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a saboteur. We are naturally smarter than the feminists (in fact, objectively better in every conceivable way), and in addition, we are well-trained in deception by our studies of game. In other words, it’ll be a piece of cake for us to mimic their arguments and appear to them as really smart girls who really know their shit.

Really? Because no one I’ve ever run across in the manosphere has managed to pull off a particularly convincing impersonation of a really smart anything.  And in order to effectively parody something, you have to actually understand it first. Given some of the truly odd things MRAs and manospherians believe about feminism and feminists – see my post on Operation Alimony yesterday for one recent example — I’m somehow thinking that the only people dumb enough to be fooled by these “false-flag-feminist” blogs will be other, yep, MRAs and manosphereians.

Nonetheless, WITBD claimed that’s he’s already started putting his little plan into action:

I have already begun false flag blogging myself. At this stage, giving the link would ruin the whole thing. But it’s out there. And “false flag blogging” returned only 87 results, of which only a few actually seemed to discuss what I’m talking about, so for the time being it seems nobody is watching out for it. Not that they’d be able to tell anyway.

His fantasies got more and more extravagant:

Think long term. The endgame is to build a big enough presence that coming out as a fake feminist generates buzz in and of itself. Imagine if it came out that the founder of Feministing was actually a men’s rights activist.

And that he could fly, and shoot lasers from his eyes! Imagination is fun!

(Note: The founder of Feministing is not actually an MRA, or a man. Nor can she fly or shoot lasers from her eyes.)

WITBD continued fantasizing:

Eventually, our false flag bloggers will coordinate with our legitimate bloggers and have “debates” where both sides are controlled by us.

And where the only people paying attention are you guys.

If you feel you are getting really good at this, attack some prominent feminists for not being feminist enough. I don’t even know what that would mean, but, hey, this is feminism. Nonsense is our bread and butter.

Wheels within wheels!

Some on In Mala Fide thought this was a dandy idea. Frost wrote:

Fuck yeah. Awesome post. …

[W]e need to get bold and creative with how we fight the war for the best minds in the western world. False flag blogging is a wide-open front. Especially if you’re new to writing and aren’t yet confident in your voice – and unless you have written many thousands of words already, the truth is your writing is probably going to suck – a false-flag blog would be a great way to hone your skills while only having to actually write at the level of typical mid-twenties gender studies grad student.

Here’s a post of mine that sadly didn’t get a lot of attention, but it’s one of my own personal favourites:

I submitted it to The Good Men project, Manboobz, and a few other Mangina sites as a guest post, but sadly no one bit. These people are just so easy to parody, it’s ridiculous.

Regular Man Boobz readers may have a rather different assessment of how effective his parody was.

Others on In Mala Fide were a bit more skeptical of the “false-flag” idea.  As out-and-proud racist thwak put it:

It sounds like a good idea, but it won’t work. Its been tried by white people on counter racism forums and they always got busted. We used to call it the “nigger impersonation syndrome”.

A white person would sign up with a name like “Jamal” and speak ebonics… but they always got busted cause at some point they hafta come out of “nigger cloak” to practice racism; i.e, say and/or do something a black person would not say/do.

Sure, they have the option of coming on the discussion board and pretending to be a full time nigger, but how does that advance the racist agenda? …

The “black White Supremacist” stuck out like a nun in a whore house everytime.

And got busted everytime.

Gosh, it’s almost as if black people are actual human beings and not just racist caricatures. And that real black people can somehow magically spot the difference between other real black people and racist assholes posting in “ebonics.”

Huh. Could the same happen with feminists?

In a followup post, WITBD dismissed the critics as uncreative cowards. And it turns out that fake blogs are only the starting point in his grand plan.

The fact is we are not the alt-right. We are the new left. We are the oppressed proles … They are the establishment. We lost “our” country. They control it all now. We have blogs. And a handful of churches and seasteading. Sucks.

Now it’s time to move on. We have to take these pieces of shit down and that means we must use leftist tactics. This kind of blogging operation is the beginning of a long march to infiltrate and undermine their institutions.

Sounds like someone has been reading Mao’s Little Red Book!

Playing around? Real men fight to win, period. We fight feminism specifically because it’s the weak point of liberalism. Read your Sun Tzu. Attacking the entire rainbow coalition at once is madness. You always attack the enemy where he is weakest.

And the weakest links are the ladies, naturally.

[N]ot all women actually benefit from feminism. They may think they win at first, but we know full well that feminist sex and the city-type women lose big time: no kids, no committed alpha, no nothing. Most women don’t benefit, and many women are recognizing this.

Right now among women, feminism is high status and actually being feminine is low status. But all women instinctively want to actually be feminine, and they have better life results when they do. We all know about how to manipulate women’s idea of status. This should be easy to work out.

If we take out or marginally disrupt feminism, and pull lots of white women out of the coalition, it crumbles in short order.

Oh no! Not the white women! Don’t take the white women!

High-IQ thundercunts are major war engines of the regime, and especially the childless ones. They actually run the agencies, corporations, HR departments, universities, etc. Without them, the enemy has a harder time operating. As well, white women are blatantly used as bait to recruit minority men into liberal groups.

Anti-feminism is something that we know well … and it is something that the other elements of the liberal coalition actually somewhat agree with us on because its not like the blacks, Mexicans, Arabs etc. are keen on empowering their women. All men of all races have common ground in dealing with the unique female brand of bullshit and thus are potential sympathizers on this issue.

So this is his grand plan: for racist white dudes like him (and much of In Mala Fide’s readership) to build a sort of antifeminist rainbow coalition with “blacks, Mexicans, Arabs, etc” … in order to take down feminism … in order to weaken liberalism … in order to screw over the “blacks, Mexicans, Arabs, etc.”

Yeah, that’s totally gonna work.

1,130 replies on “Manosphere dudes: Let’s set up fake feminist blogs to take down feminism!”

*finally reaches end of thread, then it bounces up to 1100*

This is the little thread that could. You all deserve a BIG SHINY MEDAL!



Did he actually say he was against giving things away for free? yet he vilifies women for supposedly not giving to men’s charities?


Asshole. Thy name is NWOslave.

I can’t remember if he actually said that, or if he was just against it and made an excuse xD I know ppl kept telling him that if he’s so angry about the big boxes of books he had, he should just donate them, but he wouldn’t, he just complained that he can’t resell them…

OH RIGHT, I think he claimed that nobody would take them..

Or chopped off penises…

A transphobic radfem once predicted that in the future, trans women would harvest the dead bodies of cis women for uteruses… so maybe that’ll be the new currency xD


“A transphobic radfem once predicted that in the future, trans women would harvest the dead bodies of cis women for uteruses… so maybe that’ll be the new currency xD”

o.O.. well that’s… uhm welll… o.O

Shadow – Hasn’t evo psych foretold that the currency of the future will be bottlecaps?

Bottlecaps and pussy! XD (Whether bottlecaps will be redeemable for pussy, we know not, thought there are persistent urban legend rumors you can do this right now with rolling rock, if you just know where to redeem them XD )

Shadow – o.O.. well that’s… uhm welll… o.O

You really can’t make radfems up. Or MRAs.

The irony is in how alike they both are. Their emotionally charged writing is practically interchangeable.

True, but I always expect them to save their best stuff for men! MRAs save their “best” shit for women, I demand equality!!

many MRAs and transphobic/anti-sexwork/etc Radfems seem very similar in their attitudes… who they hate, what they hate, the behaviours they hate… and both seem to have this very innate/static idea of gender differences, they just have different explanations… the rly “MEN SUCK TO THEIR CORE” radfems believe in socialization that is SO base, SO early, SO unchangeable that it might as well be genetic, while MRAs like NWO believe in the exact same things just that it’s genetic…

Honestly, I think NWO would like M Andrea and her friends.. a lot of what NWO believes, they believe… they just hate each other’s gender xD (and they blame the other gender for the stuff they hate)

For example, MtF transitioning is brainwashing by feminism vs MtF transitioning is brainwashing by the patriarchy xD

They both agree we’re brainwashed though, and it’s mutilation and that we are our birth assigned gender. xD They just can’t agree on why or who’s to blame (MRAs like the ones on The Spearhead trans article believe it’s a feminist experiment to prove the fluidity of gender, while the transphobic radfems believe that it’s a patriarchy experiment to ENFORCE the binary of genders) xD

But they both agree we’re terrible, pitiable, deluded, ideology destroying freaks xD

What’s funny is how they also seem to think the other “side” LOVES trans ppl.

My very existence sends ripples through the mano and femi spheres! xD

Sometimes I’m shocked they don’t put aside their differences and just agree to work together and get rid of sex workers, trans ppl, “sluts” etc etc and THEN they can fight each other in one final, glorious, bloody gender war with a nice, simple, clean battlefield xD

both their theories sound like bullshit and I think both sides simplify gender way too much like NWO did in this very thread. You imply that there is a third gender or there is more to gender than this naturalistic fallacy BS and they flip out.

I’m so curious to know what will become of gender in say, 20 years from now. I will admit I’m still pretty cis myself in terms of how I understand these things though :<

I think NWO was trying to imitate me in asking ppl to tell him how many genders there are b/c NWO believed that nobody here COULD answer it b/c he hasn’t thought out his worldview very well and he has trouble explaining it (and is scared of having that exposed), so therefore everybody else does too xD And as I said, he projects… he thinks the thing that hurts me most must be the thing that bugs him most, and like that, he thinks the issue that makes no sense to him must be impossible for everybody else to explain too xD

“Jesus F. Christ, it’s like arguing with a parrot!”

Come on now, be fair. Parrots occasionally say intelligent things, even though it’s only by accident.

Holy crap, I can’t believe NWO actually shared his political beliefs, in fairly straightforward language, without changing the subject or just going BLARGH YOU BLACK JEWISH FEMINIST FLOURIDE-INJECTED COMMUNIST BIG-DADDY-LOVING PRINCESS LADY-PEOPLE CAN’T HANDLE MY AMAZING SECRET TRUTHS BLARRRGH

And it turns out, after all these months… he’s Ron Paul. How anticlimactic.

Ami: NWO will also forget that I ever said that any woman who would castrate a boy is evil, and that the Sergeant Major should be punished.

As he’s made clear in the past, unless we use our feminist powers to summon the Bacchae from the Underworld and make them tear the offending woman to shreds for NWO’s amusement (I am given to believe he will giggle), we don’t really think she did anything wrong and in fact support her wholeheartedly. This includes women who a) have already been dead for centuries and b) only exist in NWO’s head.

Emma: when you marry, you swear to take care of your spouse of life, not until you meet someone younger and hotter. How you view pushing someone to quit work to raise your kids and take care of your home then abandoning them in poverty as “fair” is beyond my understanding.

“I AM doing my own research. But it can only get me that far.”
True. On the other hand, there are dozens of feminists websites you could find in 30 seconds of googling than are here to educate people. This one hasn’t this goal. If people provide you with link or books titles, say thank you, if they don’t or are clearly annoyed stop asking.

“And I see someone took issue with me saying that putting out on demand is being nice and caring. Damn right, it is! It’s about making your partner happy. And if you’re with the right partner, you won’t have to worry about them being demanding jerks. Sex is rather important in a relationship, so refusing it too often indeed means you are not nice and caring”

Whether or not you don’t mind “putting up on demand” is not an issue. You judging as uncaring someone who would not makes you a terrible person.
What you describe comes back, once more, to a relation that is, if not one of a master and slave, at least of a master and a servant. The servant can leave the master, she’s no prisoner. (though maybe she can’t, for economical reasons. That you’re think are normal and fair) But as long as the relation continue, only the master’s desires matters. The choice of the servant is in choosing the right master, the one who want demand sex too often and maybe won’t hit her too much.
In the meantime, in 2012, choosing the right partner is also about choosing someone capable to hear “not tonight”, “I don’t feel like doing that” “I’m busy” or any other reason.

Manboobzers, a little poll: Emma the emo troll, stupid or evil?

Woah, I have reached the end of the thread.

Well, for now.

I have nothing to add.

Shh, Xanthe, now NWO will accuse you of emasculating men by suggesting they could sing in the same range as women. Or that they must be modern castrati and it’s more proof that opera is a feminist Title IX/VAWA conspiracy.

I’ve never sung with a falsettist or countertenor myself, but I don’t do really do baroque. It is a cool sound, though.

NWO, my little chickadee: Women don’t sully themselves, they’ll neither shed others blood for men, nor shed any themselves. They’re far to aristocratic for that. Manipulation, coersion, deceit and cheerleading is the womans way.

Right. You’ve set up the game so you can always blame women. If a woman does an evil thing, all women are evil. If a man does an evil thing, some woman forced him to, once again showing that all women are evil.

Pathetic, the way you choose to bear false witness.

NWO: Complained that he can’t get what he paid for them when he tries to re-sell books?

My family has a used book business (it’s part of how I have so much trivia in my head, lots of material to read).

1: Does anybody want them?

That’s the first thing which is needed for a book to retain value. If no one is going to buy them, I can’t afford to be dispensing charity by paying more than are worth, just to be forced to throw them out. A used book dealer is rarely going to give cash. Cash, for anything run of the mill, will almost never be more than 10 percent of the cover price.

For credit, we’d take anything: when we still had a storefront, but the crap, was 5 cents a book; because we sold them at the price of 15 books for $2.

2: Are his books rare?

That’s the second thing a book needs to have any real cash value. Most used booksellers us a fixed ratio (we use half the cover price) for generic books. To get out of that the book has to be 1: of interest to people, and 2: rare. Those get priced differently, and may be bought with cash, for more than ten percent of cover. But the book has to be something really special to get more than cover; i.e. something which will sell for a pretty penny.

3: Are they in good condition? Rarity will help, but unless it’s so rare that it’s in the realm of “collectable” instead of “readable”, it’s got to be something the final purchaser can use.

If he can find someone willing to pay him a new price, for a used thing; which others are selling at discount, he really needs to go into sales, he’s wasted as a maintenance technician.

This morning, I ate a poached egg for breakfast! An egg that had the potential to develop into a poor innocent rooster, rather than a hen, which flaunts her ability to lay eggs so that her life may outlast the male birds on the farmer! And oh how I laughed! 😀

Uh, farmer should be farm on that last post. Though really, who knows what farmers are doing around those lady birds all day? You know what they say about men and chickens! 😉

Wow, it’s the name and avatar of a pretty young woman with a blog/persona that sounds exactly like an MRA albeit in first-person feminine, posting on a thread about MRA’s setting up fake blogs. Huh.

Emma: when I read your post saying women are “safer” and “protected” when they are stay-at-home wives, the first thing I thought of was domestic abuse. A woman who is economically dependent on her husband is not “protected” from this all-too-common cause of pain and injury and death, but made more vulnerable, as it’s harder for her to leave. This is especially true if she has kids, and therefore also has to worry about taking children away from contact with the abuser and supporting them on her own. It’s true that you said alimony should exist in cases of abusive marriage, but what about those cases that are difficult to prove? Like punches to the stomach that leave no marks and turn the violence into a he-said-she-said situation. Or verbal and emotional abuse that leaves the abused partner feeling worthless and afraid, but again leaves no marks. No one should have to choose between a miserable relationship and homelessness, but that is the choice made by those who are economically dependent on their abusers.

Then I read that you’re apparently in an intimate relationship with someone who “condones” rape and was about to go on a killing spree against those he considers feminists before he met you, and suddenly the question stopped being an academic one.

Emma, I’m worried about you. I’m not saying this to be condescending, but out of sympathy. I usually just come to this blog for quick and easy laughs and don’t bother to post or even read comments, but what you wrote, if it’s true, has made me really uneasy. I don’t know if you are just dating Eivind Berge, or living with him, or married to him, or married to him with children. I hope that you are just dating him and that the two of you don’t have kids, because he sounds like the kind of person that could easily become abusive towards you or them in the future, if he is not in fact doing it now.

I know you think that he cares about you and would never be physically or emotionally abusive to you, but he has a record of thinking violence against women is ok and that means that he might well decide, say after an argument, that he is entitled to be violent towards you. So that’s why I’m telling you, Emma, please:

Keep your money. Keep your independence.

If you have a job, keep it. If you don’t, make sure you have enough income saved up, in a separate bank account, to support yourself (and any kids if you have them) on your own for a few months. If you can’t scrape together that much in savings, at least know the phone number of a local domestic violence shelter. But try to make sure you have enough “quit money”, because you may want to leave him while he’s still just a demeaning asshole and not an outright batterer. You should be able to stay or leave based on how happy he makes you, not feel trapped in your relationship.

Good luck, be happy and stay safe.


I don’t think I ever advocated pushing someone to quit work to raise “your” kids (they are also the other person’s). I also never said abandoning them in poverty is fair. I said that to keep paying them after they decided to leave on their own accord (not due to anything terrible you have done) is not necessary, but you can still do it if you want to.

“If people provide you with link or books titles, say thank you, if they don’t or are clearly annoyed stop asking”
That is what I have done.

As for that servant/master thing, I don’t get where that came from. Are you saying this is how women choose their partners today? I said that both being demanding and refusing a lot is not caring. But you can go on believing you are being caring while depriving the partner of what they want, no matter how nicely they ask and no matter how much they are willing to do in return, without providing a legitimate reason for your refusal.

I don’t think you’re evil or stupid (neither am I), but we don’t agree. It’s cool. I think I’ll go away for a while, since my presence creates so many bad feelings.

You don’t get to judge what is or isn’t a legitimate reason for refusing sex, unless it’s you doing the refusing. And you definitely don’t get to judge the level of caring in someone else’s sex life.

I think you going away is a good plan.

I don’t think I ever advocated pushing someone to quit work to raise “your” kids (they are also the other person’s).

You don’t need, there are already plenty of stay at home parents, mainly stay at home mothers, for social and economical reasons. This is a fact that we, as societies, must deal with.

I also never said abandoning them in poverty is fair.

So it unfair? Or does it just never happen that a divorced ex-stay at home parent goes into poverty? Or is it unfair but we must live with it?

I said that to keep paying them after they decided to leave on their own accord (not due to anything terrible you have done) is not necessary,

Not necessary? What happens then to the person who spent 10 years raising a kid (ie working for the family), therefore having very few chance to get a well paid job, who one day quits their husband or is quited by them?

but you can still do it if you want to.

You do know people don’t always leave as friends? Counting on the kindness of the richest spouse won’t work in this universe.

As for that servant/master thing, I don’t get where that came from. Are you saying this is how women choose their partners today?

I got that from what you wrote. You describe sex as something the woman must do whenever the man wants, or else she should be shamed. Her only moral liberty is in the choice of the person to which she gives up her liberty as the must choose as best as she can in the hope he won’t abuse his rightful access to her vagina.
How is saying that sex should happen when both persons want it an unreasonable statement?

I said that both being demanding and refusing a lot is not caring. But you can go on believing you are being caring while depriving the partner of what they want, no matter how nicely they ask and no matter how much they are willing to do in return, without providing a legitimate reason for your refusal.

How is it not demanding to expect your partner to have sex every time you want regardless of their desire? If the man asks and the woman says no, who is at fault, is he demanding or is she uncaring? Unless you count “I don’t have any sexual desire right now/I’m busy” as a legitimate reason. Then we’re cool on that point.

I don’t think you’re evil or stupid (neither am I), but we don’t agree. It’s cool. I think I’ll go away for a while, since my presence creates so many bad feelings.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think you’re evil. It’s nice you think I’m not either, but on the other hand I don’t date (knowingly) nor defend people who condone rape and misogynists in general. And I don’t shame women for not “putting up on demand”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.