Sunday, 7 November 2010

The Masks of Hate: Misandry and the Anglo-American 'Hate Crime' Industry

Stamping out 'Hate Crime' is a prominent political theme across the English-speaking world. Hatred of ethnic or religious groups, homosexuals and even the disabled is now strictly illegal. The following description of Hate Crime is taken from the British Home Office's official website (although analogous homilies can doubtless be found across the Anglosphere):

A hate crime is any criminal offense that is motivated by hostility or prejudice based upon the victim’s:

* disability
* race
* religion or belief
* sexual orientation
* transgender

All hate crime is important. No hate crime is too minor to report to the police. Anyone can be the victim of a hate crime. We all have a racial identity, all have a sexual orientation, all have some sort of beliefs. Anyone of us could be targeted because of some aspect of our identity. Tackling hate crime supports each and every one of us.

Hate crime is different to other forms of crime:

* hate crime targets people because of their identity. It is a form of discrimination that infringes human rights and keeps people from enjoying the full benefits of our society
* research has shown that hate crimes cause greater psychological harm than similar crimes without a motivation of prejudice
* hate crime creates fear in victims, groups and communities and encourages communities to turn on each other

If the Anglobitch Thesis is true (which it is), the Anglosphere must have an inherent, all-pervasive hatred of men that undercuts these lofty pronouncements. And this is exactly what we find. For while Hate Crime is prohibited by each Anglo-American national state, pan-anglosphere misandry is actively promoted by each state against its male citizens.

Examples? We do not have to look far. The Murdochratic media ceaseless vilifies men as outcasts, misfits and sexual deviants while exalting women as paragons of virtue, beauty and intellect. This anti-male propaganda is at least as relentless as the Nazi media campaign against the Jews - but even more insidious, since its agendas are covert and unstated. As Gauleiter Julius Streicher observed: "The steady drip hollows the stone." And, as in the Third Reich, hatred of the outcast group (in this case, men) has been fully normalized since the rise of gender-feminism in the late sixties.

Misandry is also enshrined in Anglo-American law. In its practical application, the law invariably delivers pro-female outcomes, with women usually receiving half the male sentence for the same offense. Moreover, divorce laws are absurdly biased in favor of women, with the male frequently reduced to penury or suicide by the courts' shameless misandry. The fact that many Anglo-American women consciously plan for a 'starter marriage' to fleece some unsuspecting male proves that malicious misandry is rapidly becoming a female lifestyle-choice.

In Anglophone nations with extensive welfare programs such as Britain, the deployment of welfare invariably favors women, despite men contributing the overwhelming bulk of taxes. Over 90% of homeless persons are male. Moreover, the British National Health Service spends vast sums on female-specific health issues like breast cancer. By contrast, male-specific health issues such as suicide receive little recognition, let alone funding. In the United States, males have to register for the draft to be eligible for certain state scholarships. By contrast, women (who already reap the benefits of a female-biased education system) do not. Indeed, draft-registration is still nominally compulsory for all American males, despite them being tacitly viewed as Untermenschen by law, government and the media.

In light of the foregoing discussion, it must be said that males represent the primary victims of 'hate crime' across the Anglosphere. Despite this, all the noble pronouncements about the need to 'eradicate hate' never address the cloying misandry endemic in Anglo-American institutions.

This is a telling omission that strongly confirms the Anglobitch Thesis. While the Anglosphere nations can redress repressive race, class and creed agendas, misandry is too deeply embedded in Anglo-Saxon culture (as a function of its puritanical ethos) to be similarly challenged. Indeed, to do so would effectively disparage the entire conceptual thrust of Anglo culture, which is why we can never trust our governments or other formal institutions to defend male interests.

It is also telling that the only male groups effectively protected by pan-Anglosphere hate-crime laws are gays and transsexuals. This is entirely to be expected: such males simulate the female role which, as we have endlessly observed, is routinely and blindly exalted by Anglo-Saxon culture. When the only way for men to achieve protection from 'hate crime' is to adopt homosexuality (or female genitalia) the true nature of Anglo 'patriarchy' reveals itself. Only women and their mincing mimics can enter that charmed circle; the healthy, potent male never can.


  1. Wow, another great article! It's funny, in anglo-countries, if your a straight male, you basically have NO rights! If you a gay male, transgender male, or a female, you have all the rights you want and then some! WTF?

    What a dsyfunctional society anglo-countries are! They truely hate men (at least men who are straight) even though more men die in wars defending anglo-countries, more men pay taxes than women do in anglo-countries and divorce laws favor women over men big time in these anglo-countries!

    It makes me wonder what we men who live in Anglo countries can do to help ourselves (besides moving to more man friendly countries). I guess it starts with not marrying an "anglo-bitch" and try to elect people who are not anti-male.

    1. We don't marry or have children, hence the declining birth rate and we go out on Saturday nights and bash queers and transsexuals for fun!

  2. I find it interesting how discrimination against gender is not included under 'hate crimes', even though it would be to most of us. This is instructive, because by excluding gender, the Anglo authorities are in fact indicating that it is quite proper to discriminate against males. Some would also argue that this means that the Anglo government is fine with people discriminating against women, but this is obviously not so, due to the old Anglo tendency to defend Anglo women that makes enacting a law of this nature practically pointless. In this case, Anglo society basically covers for gaps within legislation enacted by Anglo authorities, as anyone speaking out against women in public will likely face immediate censure, even if their criticisms are not unreasonable. Hence, the Anglo governments are acknowledging and reflecting society's attitudes towards women and men. I also doubt that a man using this against the government would get anywhere.

  3. That is so true, especially in the hyper-puritanical United States. Men here have even fewer rights than the rest of the Anglosphere. Over here, not a week goes by that some high-profile guy doesn't have his career wrecked over a rumor or allegation---usually over nothing even that serious. That's just the ones we hear about, and the media pays more attention to 'sex scandals' than to genuine crimes.

    A great example is what happened to ex-President Clinton. He was nearly removed from office. Why? Because of corruption or human rights violations? No, because he had a tryst with a female staffer. That was worse to the American mind than the people who died at Waco or the war in Kosovo, or numerous other serious things.

  4. *A great example is what happened to ex-President Clinton. He was nearly removed from office. Why? Because of corruption or human rights violations? No, because he had a tryst with a female staffer. That was worse to the American mind than the people who died at Waco or the war in Kosovo, or numerous other serious things.*

    It is astonishing that many people still claim that contemporary America (or indeed, the Anglosphere in general) is an incredibly 'liberated' place when the President has to publicly apologize for the 'crime' of having sex with someone.

    Another observation that will interest Americans - despite half of American males (or more) now being single, isn't it strange that the President HAS TO BE MARRIED AND HAVE CHILDREN? And the same is true of British and Commonwealth Prime Ministers. Why can't the President or Prime Minister be a player who deploys Game or uses prostitutes? Why can't he just be single and celibate? Why can't he just have a mistress 'on the side'? My rather laboured point is this: if the Anglosphere were truly liberated, truly liberated behaviour among political figures would not be so severely censured. Yet Berlusconi's antics would NEVER be tolerated in an Anglosphere country. David Cameron almost HAD to get married before becoming Prime Minister.

    I think this convention is a kind of subtle discrimination against single men. It tacitly says: 'Despite single men now being a majority they are somehow untrustworthy and irresponsible and unfit to hold office'.

    So much for Anglo liberation.

  5. No intention of downgrading your general argument here Rookh, but Ted Heath was famously single; and that I recall was often grounds for speculation as to his 'sexuality'.

    I suppose we can put that down as: 'the exception that highlights the rule'.


  6. Edward Heath! However, I recall he was resolutely and mysteriously asexual, which is as far as an Anglo-Saxon leader dare deviate from puritan convention (if asexuality could be considered deviation from puritanism, as such). He certainly wasn't bedding too many twenty year olds (whose names have come down to us), that was for damned sure. In some ways resembled Heath resembled fascist dictators like Hitler or Mussolini - a stainless, celibate leader mysteriously wedded to the nation as a whole...

    Maybe I'm gilding him a little!

  7. I must take issue with the idea that Bill Clinton had sex with an intern. Even women acknowledge that a blow-job is not sex. I have always felt very sorry for Bill. You are the most powerful man in the world yet even some oral sex could end your Presidency. What would your average Roman Emperor or Tudor Monarch make of that!

  8. The Murdochratic media ceaseless vilifies men as outcasts, misfits and sexual deviants while exalting women as paragons of virtue, beauty and intellect.