Saturday, 21 December 2013

Mapping the Enemy: Feminism V. Residual Misandry

The various Men's Movements are, by common consent, much less effective than they might be. While this impotence is partly the result of incoherent aims, other problems are also at work. When a movement cannot clearly identify its targets, its energies cannot be effectively directed. In order to function and effect positive change, a movement must possess a clear conceptual map of its environment and adversaries. At present, the Men's Movement lacks such a map.

The main obstacle to producing this map lies in the movement's obsession with organized feminism. Indeed, many MRA blogs and sites incorporate the title 'anti-feminist'. This is not to say, of course, that feminism does not exist. Indeed it does, and exerts considerable influence on most western nations (most especially those in the Anglosphere and Scandinavia). The recent attacks on legalized prostitution in France and Germany are the work of feminists, for example.

However, much of the daily oppression men experience is not the work of feminists, as such. Rather, it is the product of what I shall term 'residual misandry'. Residual misandry is not 'created' by anyone; it is a free-floating entity embedded in most western societies at a deep, structural level. The notion that men are expendable is a good example of residual misandry. This assumption is embedded in law, politics, academia and the media, and long antedates the rise of pan-Anglosphere feminism in the late 1950s.

American Civil War dead: males were considered expendable long before feminism.

The distinction between feminism and residual misandry is crucial to understanding male oppression in the West. 'Conservative' masculinists seem to view all anti-male agendas as 'feminist' - as if feminists produced all films, books and laws, or ran all courts or political parties. Of course, a great many anti-male agendas are products of feminism - especially educational misandry, a rampant force in schools and colleges. However, if we consider anti-male agendas in the mass media or the family courts, it is hard to identify organized feminism as specifically responsible. Instead, such discrimination seems to be the product of a free-floating, ubiquitous misandry that, while present in all western nations, is especially potent in the Anglosphere.

The Anglosphere's legal bias against men would still exist without feminism

In many instances, feminist views concur with institutional misandry. Hatred of the dynamic force that is male sexuality has a long history in the Anglosphere, for instance. And feminists have exploited 'residual misandry' to label all prostitutes as 'trafficked' and their patrons as 'abusers'. Indeed, the potent misandry of pan-Anglosphere feminism owes much to the residual misandry specific to Anglo-Saxon culture.

However, feminism remains for the most part distinct from 'residual misandry'. The fact that a male criminal is far more likely to receive a custodial sentence is not the result of organized feminism, but rather a free-floating notion that all men are 'evil'. Likewise, the fact that family courts favour ex-wives in every circumstance results from the same 'residual misandry'. My own contribution to the Men's Movement has been to describe this embedded, subliminal agenda, at least as it exists in the Anglosphere. Now, armed with an accurate map of the battleground and our adversaries, effective resistance is possible.

Map it right: Feminism in politics and academia is distinct from 'residual misandry'


  1. Rookh wrote: "much of the daily oppression men experience is not the work of feminists, as such. Rather, it is the product of what I shall term 'residual misandry'. Residual misandry is not 'created' by anyone; it is a free-floating entity embedded in most western societies at a deep, structural level."

    This is very true, there is a "free-floating residual misandry" in anglo countries. So not only do men have to deal with feminists in anglo-nations, they also have to bear the brunt of "residual misandry" which is alive and well in all anglo countries.

    Rookh, do you think the only real solution for men is to move to more "male friendly" countries like Brazil, Germany, Russia and the Philippines?

  2. *Rookh, do you think the only real solution for men is to move to more "male friendly" countries like Brazil, Germany, Russia and the Philippines?*

    James, I have thought deeply about this and I am starting to believe nothing will ever change in the Anglosphere countries for men. Conservative masculinists think that merely defeating feminism will solve all their problems; but they are dead wrong. I think the all-pervasive 'residual misandry' in the US, UK and other Anglo countries will always threaten men, whether feminism exists or not. Clearly, resisting feminism in itself is insufficient to secure male freedom. Perhaps emigration to man-friendly countries is the best answer.

    1. Rookh, what countries would you suggest would be the best for men to emigrate to? I have heard great things about the Philippines, Germany, Austria, France, Ukraine and Russia.

      Do you have a list of countries that men from Anglo nations should look into moving to?

    2. James, all those countries are good. I would also throw in some of the South American countries like Brazil, as well as eastern European countries like the Czech Republic. Despite their anti-male legal systems, even the Scandinavian countries are preferable to the Anglosphere - as least the women are slim and presentable, not obese warpigs.

    3. Thanks Rookh, I am seriously considering Germany as a country I might relocate to. Their economy is doing better than America's is right now and prostitution is legal there (in the US, it's illegal).

      If I live in Germany, I would be in the center of Europe and it would be very easy for me to travel to other European countries.

      I do have a bachelors degree in psychology and I could always get a job teaching English as a second language.

    4. Yes, not that many Germans speak good English and they are eager to learn. Obviously, ready access to willing prostitutes is an important lifestyle option for all men but civilian German women are in any case far more personable, attractive and liberated than obese, Anglo-American war-pigs... and a hell of a lot slimmer and better educated, as well.

      Yes, Germany is well-positioned. Austria, Italy and France are a stone's throw away, not to mention eastern Europe: Poland, Russia, the Czech republic. One of my friends works as an IT consultant in eastern Europe and he has a model in his bed every night.

  3. James Bond:
    I've been wondering about the same thing. Aside from the Radical Feminists here in the US, I've noticed a subset of (nominally) conservative or 'traditional' women has emerged who identify as feminists at all; but they've completely imbibed feminist ideals of empowerment along with a casual misandry that manifests itself clearly when provoked.

    Specimens of this type are women like Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter, among the cougar set, while Danica Patrick would be a good example of the younger celebrity version. Basically, they're sort of like the comic-book heroine 'Wonder Woman': prom queens on the outside and Amazon warriors on the inside.

    The point being here that even if this female type became the majority in America, the situation for men wouldn't improve much; (other than female aesthetic value would improve over the fat, ugly femihags LOL).

    Expatting though isn't always feasible for a lot of American men---however we do have a large immigrant culture and that may help somewhat over here.

  4. Eric wrote: "Expatting though isn't always feasible for a lot of American men---however we do have a large immigrant culture and that may help somewhat over here."

    I agree Eric, it's not easy moving to a foreign country. You need to first find a country you want to live in, then find a job there and then find a place to live. You also have to learn the language of that country as well.

    I also live in the USA and there are some women here from foreign countries who are light years better than your typical American woman. The thing is, these women get snatched up quickly by men (because these women tend to be beautiful, thin and feminine).

    The trick is to find a woman who just moved to the US from a non-anglo country before another guy snatches her up!

    I am still debating whether or not I should move to another country. I am seriously considering Germany.

    1. James Bond:
      It's true that the immigrant girls get snatched up quickly---also a lot of immigrant men don't approve of such 'poaching'. I can't really blame them; every one of their own women lost to an American guy is one more foreign guy relegated to Ameroskanks!

      I've thought about Europe too. The only thing would be that I would reverse the order of expatting somewhat---get a place to live and a job lined up before going over there. I've also considered Puerto Rico, Samoa, and Hawaii as possible choices for 'internal expatting'. Who knows that any of those places won't become independent countries eventually anyway---and they have low populations of Amerobitches.

  5. The best solution is to simply give up on women, or at the very least, to avoid marriage and long term relationships with women.

    Vast majority of American women aren't worth a damn anyway, so this is actually very easy. It's easy to boycott a useless product.

  6. PS. Any man stupid enough to still get married nowadays probably deserves to suffer. So let the misandric "social conservatives" beta men keep getting married. These are the same men who hate us MGTOWs for choosing freedom, and so why should I care if they get their life ruined by a woman? They hated on the very group of men who were trying to save them. So fine. Let the idiotic Christian men marry all the born again sluts and have their lives ruined. Those men are all pathetic losers, for the most part.

  7. Dr. Kshatriya - it makes me sick that "The Talk" on CBS is still being aired.

    "The Talk" is not a "feminist" show.

    They (all female hostesses and an all female audience) celebrated, applauded and laughed at a man being drugged, tortured, and sexually mutilated - without even knowing his character (there was no valid reason for them to hate him - his crime was being male).

    I see other examples of this elsewhere too.

    The site "RegisterHer" is - well - kind of lame.

    It targets individuals - not institutions.

    What do you think about a site that is devoted to focusing strictly on male-hatred (like "The Talk" and incidents similar) and calling upon people to bombard them with letters, e-mails and whatnot?

    Even new-comers could express their disgust that "The Talk" is still being aired, and all the hostesses still have jobs.

    I could make a site that targets such institutions - feminism would not be the main "Criteria", instead, I would use blatant male hatred (like what was seen on "The Talk") as a criteria to compose a list.

    Said list would include e-mails, physical addresses, and phone numbers for people to contact and let their disgust be heard.

    Any thoughts/ideas/suggestions?

  8. I think the media you describe are obvious examples of residual misandry in action. None of these websites or TV shows are overtly feminist - that is, they have no direct link to academic feminism.They just suck up the residual misandry floating around the US like a Dyson hoover and recycle it to an audience of women steeped in residual misandry: a sealed system, completely self-referential and unchallenged. The Men's Movement spend far too much time attacking feminism - a fairly marginalized movement, after all - and no time trying to redress the manifold abuses associated with residual misandry.

    A website or blog dedicated to exposing residual misandry in the mainstream/online media sounds like a great idea. David Futrelle spends much of his day lambasting MRAs for our lack of constructive action - perhaps such a dynamic website would refute his position? If emails and relevant contact details were added to get men off their butts and on their feet, so much the better.

    Also, you would have no shortage of material to use on the site. Call it something like 'Exposure: Exposing Latent Misandry in the US Media since 2014'.

  9. I entirely agree. Perhaps somewhat off-topic but pertinent, I read today that there is for the first time a preponderance of females in The New Year's Honour's List. It will be spun as a triumph for women, but is surely something else, namely either, women are being favoured by reason of Vagina or, - and this is worse - men are simply giving up unmotivated on a tilted playing-field. I am sure of course that it is the former. It means that being that harder for a male to get a gong the fewer men that get the gong are shafting those that don't. This has nothing to do with feminism but a lot to do with the usual anti-male bias. It will also of course lower the perceived value of the gong for the women but raise it for men. I doubt that any newspaper or Media channel will pick up on that.