As the Men’s Movement grows, both in size and in social awareness, there has been a similar growth in the calls for moderation, for a publicly palatable presentation of men’s issues. Nearly universally, these calls come from those who are new to the movement, or of a Socialist ideological bent. And there is good reason for this commonality, the same reason why following this approach is foolhardy.
Men are controlled in society primarily through the use of the stick, rather than the carrot. Anyone with a Y chromosome growing up in the political West is familiar with the concepts, if not particularly aware of them:
I’m sure you get the picture. One thing that seems to be a common thread among these social narratives is the acceptance of men, by women, for sexual relations. That, in essence, is the stick being used to beat men with. And it’s an obviously powerful one given that all the narratives outlined above, especially the Grand Kahuna narrative (female sex objects, male success objects), which is shamelessly hypocritical, yet widely supported.
This is cognitive dissonance on a massive scale, and in my view is akin to a deeply held and dogmatic religious belief shared by an overwhelming majority of a society, infecting nearly all of its power structures. So, how does one fight this sort of entity?
The key to winning this fight is a bit of guerrilla tactics, combined with a multi-pronged approach. And like any tactic designed around using the enemy’s strength against them, our best approach is to make criticism of our goals an open admission of hypocrisy on theirs. In short, as is the case with nearly the best method of attacking them is to use their own projections against them.
Obviously, the minds that swallow feminist bullshit are damaged in some way, are they not? Or perhaps you think they are merely misinformed, and once they learn the truth they will fight for what’s right?
There’s a problem in this kind of thinking. Actually, two. First, women tend to get their ‘facts’ from what is called ‘Social Proofing’. Basically, a popularity contest for ideas or actions. If a lot of other women like it, then it must be good.
The other problem is the male compulsion to please females. Rather, the distortion of the compulsion to attract females.
This leads to a startlingly simple to state strategy, sure to be far harder to implement than it may seem:
Make women feel ‘unpopular’, or ‘unattractive’, when engaging in undesired behaviors…but do it in a way that makes them want to fuck you. And anyone who knows anything about women will tell you, one naturally leads to the other. This is not “Game.” It is sexual politics on a personal level.
I don’t think I need to go into basic Sexual Marketplace ideas here, but it should be obvious that the Rebellious persona is a hell of a lot more compelling than the Conciliator persona. All feminist babble and bullshit aside, ‘damn the torpedoes’ attitude is far more attractive to women than a soft, respectful tone will ever be. And any woman will tell you, when a man asks for permission he loses her respect to some degree, when he ‘takes charge’, on the other hand….
Regardless, any examination of the history of the men’s movement should, by now, reveal two things to you. One, moderation is patently ineffective. Two, aggressive and uncompromising and corrective assertion of the truth, with total indifference to who it offends, works.
It works so well that they have started to foster their own undoing with violence in the street. We need to stay directly in their faces, and disabuse ourselves of the myth that a lot of women are not turned on by it. For a lot of them, it soaks their panties. You don’t have to even care about that to find it useful.
Source:click here
Here is the that peaceful,loving attitude from feminists that Factory was talking about:
It's good to see Factory back and discussing a subject I've brought up numerous times in the past. We are in agreement that a moderate voice accomplishes nothing and we've gone great guns using the militancy. Some have asked Why the militancy? and I believe I've answered that question. We're fighting the good fight and we have to keep it up if we're going to win.
1 comment:
This is an excellent article. Talking nice to feminism FAILED more than a century ago for E. Belfort Bax, and his generation. It failed when feminists demanded suffrage and has failed every year since. Moderation against feminism is, was, and will be capitulation to feminist victory. I have personally been booted from several faux "MRM" web sites for posting opinions supporting men rather than pandering to females. Those voices for "moderation" are working against men. Females fuck for manly men, not for pansies and wusses that allow themselves to be manipulated by her.
Quibble: Female shit is "Cowshit." Calling her feminist crap "bullshit" blames men for everything bad, even female bad.
Post a Comment