Friday, 21 December 2012

The Right Road: The Correct Response to Feminist Perfidy

The Anglo-American men’s movement has generally internalized the Darwinian worldview, at least as it pertains to gender relations. Unfortunately, this world-view can be used to legitimate male expendability. Moreover, the Darwinian model explains institutionalized misandry quite well – especially military gendercide, biased divorce laws and negative media representations of men. Indeed, many feminists and White Knights cherry pick aspects of evolutionary psychology as conceptual justification for male disposability, female hypergamy and other misandrist agendas.

The contemporary men’s movement remains marginalized because it seeks to mimic feminism. MRAs complain about the Sympathy Gap they experience, assuming they will reflexively attract the same sympathy and support as misandrist gender-feminism. They won’t of course – least of all from the male elite, who view them with bemused contempt. How, then, should the men’s movement proceed? If men are biologically programmed to compete for status and sex and view other men as expendable, how can a cogent and effective men’s movement ever develop?

The answer is that it won’t – at least, not in the way feminism has developed, with political patronage and government grants. It must choose a different road, one that acknowledges public indifference to men’s issues. In short, the Sympathy Gap needs expanding, not contracting – and reciprocating in kind. Since men are treated as expendable mercenaries, they should embrace that role – sever all social bonds and obligations, shun permanent relationships and generally view the world with cynical detachment.

The strongest man is he who stands alone; and no man demonstrates this truth more than the mercenary male, striding from land to land without bonds, commitments or ideals. Stunned and shaking, the elite and its feminist allies already tremble at this rising tide of masculine disengagement.


  1. Rookh:
    Excellent and timely. The American MRM especially has been rushing headlong into this Sympathy Gap that you've described---even to the point where one prominent American MRM blogger has declared that the MRM and feminism are working for the same goals.

    Of course, it defies logic to believe that mens rights and misandry could ever be compatible.

    The best course is exactly as you described: men must stand as MEN because feminism, an unnatural system, will eventually collapse.

  2. I encourage Paul Elam and his work, if for no other reason than it exposes hypocrisy. And while it might not be possible to change the culture of male disposability, Paul Elam working through legitimate channels can certainly achieve legislative reform.

    Allowing the Mens Movement's legitimate actors like Paul Elam to work on their goals can even succeed through failure. As a total evisceration of the MRM's legitimate men in the public domain (as for example with Warren Farrell recently) will simply drive more men mercenary.

    Look at the attitude of the young women in Toronto, is it really surprising to learn that a culture like Canada's of total Female Dominance has lead to a near-zero birthrate for the UMC, specifically the white UMC?

    I'd be a mercenary male too if I lived in that culture every day. Most Canadian men seem to feel the same if demographics is any indication.

  3. Anon2348:
    Where I disagree here is with Elam's adoption of feminist methods. For example, in Toronto recently there was a sign making the rounds proclaiming that '1 in 6 males are victims of abuse.' Obviously, the number is as fraudlent as the feminist numbers on rape.

    Besides, there's nothing whatsoever to be gained by roping men into the feminist-dominated and controlled Abuse Industry.

    Many of the increasing numbers of female commentators on AVfM have also spoken out against AOC laws; based entirely on the feminist paradigm that all sex is 'rape' because of a supposed 'imbalance of power.' Paul Elam is totally comfortable with that position; as well as his dubious policy of allowing females to be 'a voice for men' in the first place.

    I agree that he's done good work in the past; but he's leading the American MRM into some very dangerous waters. A co-opted men's movement may not stop men from going mercenary, but it can certainly pose a serious obstacle to men finding their ways out.

    1. Clearly I don't keep up with this stuff as much as I should i didn't know about the rape culture and seeming influence of female mras. They will reveal themselves as man up types as time goes on, I've been through a few cycles of lady mra showing up and then revealing their misandry, time will tell.

      What needs tO happen is for the puritanical culture of the anglosphere to be modified, chiefly prostitution must be legalized and destigmatized.

    2. Your absolutely right that prostitution needs to legalized in the USA. Of course, the feminists and religious leaders would protest outside of brothels if it was legalized.

      In the USA's puritanical culture, men desiring sex is considered an evil thing. Some feminists see all sex as rape, even sex between married people! That's because sex is male dominated.

      Most feminists are so ugly, they couldn't get laid if their life depended on it. Don't worry all you feminists, we men don't desire you at all and we wouldn't touch you with a ten foot pole!

    3. Women always get sex, no matter how ugly

      Getting a committed husband, that requires more qualities

      And therefore these women oppose easy access to more attractive women, be they younger, or cheaper (prostitutes)


      But, I get your point and I agree with you

  4. Men should simply walk away from society except when they can profit from it or gain pleasure. We should refuse to support women except unless we get what we want in return. No money no honey....

    1. Add to that a healthy dose of contempt and disgust, season with a sneer and ice it with the slogan "Yo femmie, do it yourself" and there you have it!

    2. you mean: no honey, no money?

      If she gives no honey, you give no money!?

      That is the perversion of family court

      The man has to give money. In exchange he gets no honey, no sex, no sympathy, no friendliness. And he does not get access to the kid, no say on how the money is spent on the kid, which school the kid goes to. Not even a say if the money goes towards the school or the bitch's new shoes

  5. very interesting points you raise.

    I agree with your view on Paul Elam at

    He has a good fight.

    But I got kicked out from there.
    For opposing arrest of parents who take bath photos of their kids to walmart

    or for opposing prison to men who possess movies of themself jerking off when 12 years old

    I seriously bemoan the mens rights disunity while feminists perfectly embrace dick slicing women, murderers who suffer from battered women syndrome, shooters like Valerie Solanas and more.

    MRA against men! Most MRA (men’s rights activist) actively support draconian prison sentences for men #4

    1. Overton window friend. The amount of backlash against anglo feminism has already made feminism a dirty word and feminists stigmatized as ugly dykes. Lots of women are switching sides, as their mentality is prone to follow the herd. But the overton window isn't close to here those issues can be addressed without emotion. It took 120 years from the suffragettes to vawa. We have a long way and a lot of legislation to fight before we get to that.

  6. "Since men are treated as expendable mercenaries, they should embrace that role – sever all social bonds and obligations, shun permanent relationships and generally view the world with cynical detachment. "

    Yeah, well, go for it and stop whining then. I mean exactly what is stopping you? Except that that is what you seem to be doing already, and it doesn't seem to be working. Your bitterness and jealousy is such that you seek to persuade other men to become as unhappy as you are now.

    1. Anon, in case you failed to notice, you came here. You can't make the claim of whining (which is a ridiculous ad hominem and delegitimizing tactic to begin with, and only a child's mind can think whining is an appropriate word) in a private sphere.

      If anything, the Anglo sluts who end up getting surprise sexed after tarting themhmselves up and hanging around Newcastle on a Friday night and don't like the consequences because they asked for it, are the ones whining.

    2. What business is it of yours what I do? And if other men want to adopt a mercenary posture, why is that any of your business either?

    3. To a feminist, EVERYTHING is her business. Feminism could not survive without government patronage, after all.

      To them, the personal IS political. Nothing is sacred except the notion of female infallibility.

  7. Late to the party: excellent article. I have no time for AvFM