Why I am an Anti-Feminist, Part 12:

«Evening Greetings»

I’ve got a pre-ramble for you today. Don’t worry; I’ll get back to the usual cruel and unusual rambling before long.

This will be my last post for the year. I’m taking a break from writing, rambling, raving and ranting in order to celebrate Christmas and ring in the new year with all the moderately priced champagne, colossally caffeinated beverages and beard-harvested mushrooms a growing boy could ever need.

I will be back early in January, with the threat of a few new book-releases on the horizon and an ever-expanding library of rambling diatribes designed to stoke the fires of hell itself.

I hope you will enjoy yourselves over the holiday clusterfuck… Whatever happens next year, it can not possibly be worse than what happened this year, surely? Or should I not tempt the Gods, perhaps? Best to keep my mouth shut, my eyes on the ground and my beard flapping in the wind.

Merry everything, and a happy new current year!

There is a very distinct difference in received empathy where men and women are concerned. Men receive far less empathy in society and by society than women do. This ought to be self-evident by quite a few things, though the two things that are of most importance to me personally are as victims of violence, be that intimate partner violence or random acts of violence, and suicide. These two topics are quite important to me due to personal experiences, which I will not delve into here. May be a selfish reason for these topics being so important to me, but we are all – in one way or other – driven by our own experiences. I think it is safe to say that we are products of our experiences in life, for good or for bad and in one way or another.

Men experience more violence than woman. Far more, in fact.

And men commit suicide far more than women.

Yet, what we – as a society – care about, is ending violence towards women.

What we – as a society – care about, is that women attempt suicide more than men.

Not that men are successful in their suicides.

Not that men kill themselves.

Nope.

We care that women fail at suicide-attempts, even going so far as to wonder if experienced sexism is to blame for an increase in female suicide-attempts. ( https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39210463 ) Amazing, I think.

Consider this, when it comes to suicide attempts: how many of the registered suicide-attempts are repeat “offenders”? How many of the registered suicide-attempts are self-harm registered as suicide-attempts?

See, back in my teens, I did quite a lot of self-harming. This of course brought me into the folds and tender headlock of psychiatry, wherein they attempted to label my self-harm as suicide attempts. Which I refused to let them do, as I had no wish to have it written down that I attempted suicide when I did not attempt suicide. Obviously. Though this is an anecdotal experience, I doubt that I am the only one whose self-harm – serious as self-harm may very well be – was registered as a suicide-attempt.

Lastly: how many of these suicide-attempts are a cry for help, not a genuine suicide-attempt?

It should of course go without saying that I absolutely believe cases of self-harm and cries for help shall be taken seriously; that those who do it should be given consideration and help. I am not trying to downplay any suffering or mental health issues which may very well be very, very real and very, very destructive.

I do, however, find it really odd that so many men kill themselves and that this is considered less of a problem than women failing to kill themselves; that the real deaths of men by their own hands are given less consideration and less attention than women attempting – and failing – to kill themselves.

There is a crisis – worldwide – of men killing themselves, yet we hear precious little about it and we care even less about it than we hear about it. This is very odd in a society in which the claim is that men, not women, are the ones who are cared for and cared about, given all manner of privilege and protection.

I believe it would be safe to state that the rates at which men kill themselves point to certain experiences in life and in society for men which ought to warrant investigation as well as concern. Investigation and concern that is not painted, tainted and perverted to obscenity by feminist ideologues who claim to do good but who, inevitably, fall back on their tried and true formula of blaming men for their own ills. “It is toxic masculinity that makes men kill themselves, it is traditional masculinity, it is the ideology of masculinity…” and on, and on and on.

Frighteningly often, when we do hear about it, it is presented through feminist goggles, googles, and problem-glasses, framing it within the confines of their ideology. “Toxic Masculinity (trademarked)” seems to be a relatively new term within their vocabulary. Used to be they used the term “hegemonic masculinity”.

I have not heard the term “hegemonic masculinity” for some time.

It does seem to have been removed and replaced with “toxic masculinity”, for some reason.

This replacement of terms seem to happen ever so often within their scatterbrained marvel-ideology. I assume one term has been spent, debunked and used up and so a new one must take its place, lest they prove themselves to be the frauds, hacks, con-artists and shams that they are. Though, admittedly, I am more or less thinking aloud now.

As long as boys, men, masculinity can be blamed, the feminist hive-mind can rinse their hands of blood and make the claim that they care about men as well… that they do, in fact, advocate for men as well as women and so there is no need for a men’s movement, thank you very much… for feminism has that covered. Despite feminism being for women. Just a damned shame that they see no qualms in “victim-blaming” when it is a man that is a victim of something, then.

For make no bloody mistake about it – pointing to masculinity itself and claiming that this is the reason for men’s higher rates of suicide and men’s higher rates of experienced violence is victim-blaming. It is pointing at something that is a natural part of men – their masculinity – and telling them that this is the reason for their pain.

They use the term “toxic masculinity” to try and divert the attention away from the fact of the matter. The fact of the matter being that they blame masculinity, whether referred to as “toxic” or “hegemonic” or whatever newly found star-spangled terminology they can conjure forth.

It is still masculinity at fault. “Toxic masculinity” is such a nebulous, swirling, fluid, gaseous and strange term that it can mean any display of masculine behaviour, as long as some feminist or other dislikes it.

Try using the term “toxic femininity” for a few days, and see how many women – feminist or no – that take offence to it. And rightly so. I have even seen feminists claim that women who behave in toxic ways display toxic masculinity, not toxic femininity.

This is interesting, to say the least.

So: women who behave badly display traits of toxic masculinity, not traits of toxic femininity. Men who behave badly do also display toxic masculinity.

There is no toxic femininity, in other words.

When women behave badly, it is still men who are at fault, still masculinity that is to blame.

…But it is not about hating men, you guys, honest.

To be clear: I object to both the terms “toxic masculinity” and “toxic femininity”, on the grounds that people can be toxic, abusive, ugly and destructive no matter their sex. Putting “toxic” in front of either femininity or masculinity does nothing but present an inherently negative attitude to either.

Also of interest: proposing, as the feminist hive-mind do, that everything ought to be gender neutral seems fairly deceitful when feminism constantly gender terms and words, labelling everything bad masculine and everything positive feminine. Gender-neutral thus translates into female-centric. That is to say: men bad, women good. There is only one sex and one gender when speaking on sex and gender. And that gender is female. Because of course it is. Despite there being seven billion genders, or something like that. Who even keeps count any more except those who wish to be seen as special and important, who have no special sets of skills and so chose something that sounds special and precious, despite being nothing but an absurd display of superficiality?

Both men and women have a shadow-side. Of this I am certain. It is a human thing, not a gender-thing, not a sex-thing, not a masculine thing and not a feminine thing. Though its presentation and its behaviour may be different depending on ones sex, it boils down to destructive, selfish, narcissistic, violent, etc., behaviour. Something which ought not to be celebrated.

Feminism tend to celebrate the shadow side of femininity, the feminine shadow, as something good and decent and pure… something that now finally has its time and wrinkly dime for being suppressed and oppressed by the patriarchy for so long… and so it is to be let loose, leaving them free to engage in behaviour that would be vilified and demonized were it men doing it, but which is celebrated as strength and virtue and what-not when it is women doing it. Scoffing at the notion of men having any problems at all, for example, making it so that women – and only women – and their perceived problems shall be heard and taken seriously within our culture is one such thing; celebrated and acknowledged despite being an obscene display of egotism.

Narcissism, egotism, selfishness and navel-gazing is celebrated as a virtue, if it comes from the cunt-fused smile of an ovary-acting feminist woman.

I prefer to refer to this type of behaviour as “Full Frontal Rectal Examination Syndrome”.

Meanwhile, men’s rights activists and advocates who dare defy the norm and point to quite a few ways, places, things and various doo-dads, doo-hickeys and so and such within society where men experience problems, suffer quite genuine discrimination, hardships, issues, problems, and so and such are painted as foul misogynists. “Misogynist” being another word that has been destroyed through its overuse. It means nothing any more.

The reason for MRA’s being labelled misogynists is, amongst other things, that we do not put women up front and centre, on a pedestal, as it were. For that is, apparently, where women belong, even when the sexes are to be treated equally. Add to this a bucket of lies, shit and filth claiming that we blame women for all our problems, for instance – which is not the least bit true. There is a tendency to oppose feminism. This is true. But opposing feminism does not equal opposing women. For feminism does not equal women, despite what feminism claims. Believe it or not.

This doo-hickey of theirs makes no sense.

Once seen, it can never be unseen. Though seeing it involves peeling 50-odd years worth of lies, propaganda and bullshit from ones red-rimmed eyes. A difficult task, without a doubt. For it is a task that greatly alienates one from the broader society; a task that will label one an outcast, a heretic and an outlaw, that will turn friends and family against one. It means going completely against the grain, against the flow, against the currents of society.

Social suicide is what it is.

The proverbial Red Pill is a terribly bitter pill to swallow, and the side-effects of said pill are dangerous. Once labelled an outlaw, one is not protected by the law. By which I mean mob-law. The regular social norms no longer apply, and one can wave goodbye to civility and understanding, compassion and basic human decency. Hell has no fury like a feminist scorned. And the roots of feminism dig deep, feeding on gynocentrism that flows like a current beneath the streets of our civilization, filled and re-filled and maintained by the blood, sweat and tears of men.

I, and I suppose most MRA’s (at least that is my experience), see no problems with women and the problems they face being taken seriously and given due consideration. For, in being different, men and women face different challenges. To claim that neither experience any difficulties or problems related to their sex is dishonest at best.

The problem and issue arise when women, and only women, and their problems are given consideration. Far above and beyond what would be considered due consideration. And this to the detriment of men, the minimizing of men’s issues and downright refusal to acknowledge that men face any real problems in society. Unless those problems can be presented as being created and maintained by something to do with men – masculinity, the nefarious, vapour-like patriarchy, and other such nonsense.

The problem and issue arise when feminism, and only feminism, are allowed to speak on the topic. For both men and women. As though they and their movement are the only movement, the only voice, the only what-ever to speak on the problems facing men and women both, amplifying the problems women face to the point of absurdity and erasing the problems men face to the point of a farce, giving leeway to ridicule and smear men’s rights activists and advocates as though this is fair treatment of this loosely knit group of rebels, vagabonds and outcasts.

The problem and issue arise when the force supposedly there to create “equality” between the sexes push and push and push for, and receive, special privileges and protection for women. Gender quotas in universities are a prime example of this. Still there for women to an overwhelming degree, despite women being in the majority in higher education. Odd and peculiar, that. One should believe that women being the majority would give rise to a certain push to get more men into higher education.

Not so, though – no, no, no.

You see – there may be more women in higher education, but there are more men in certain fields of higher education, and so the push must be there to get more women into those fields of education. For more men than women must be proof of gender discrimination, whereas more women than men is proof of gender equality. Makes perfect sense, of course, if one is blind and deaf from birth, lacking in cognitive abilities and constantly trapped in the bathroom with a case of chronic diarrhoea of the reason.

Also known as feminism.

Women choose the wrong type of education according to feminism, which also believe that women should choose what they want to do as long as they choose what feminism wants them to choose. Which is, incidentally, not what feminism prefers them to choose. But, no mind, little matter. What matters is for them to have something to complain about so that they are still considered relevant in this day and age of chronic Honk.

And a merry honk fucking honk to you too and #MeToo.

So women major in gender studies to become feminist activists that then bitch, moan and complain that there are too few women in STEM fields. This despite them studying for a pointless and useless degree that will do nothing but lull them into propaganda-like dream-states within the walls and fractured confines of their universities, in which they will do nothing but alienate men even more from higher education and complain that women are alienated from higher education.

Honk bloody honk.

More men than women in certain fields must therefore mean that men conspire to keep women out of these fields. Giving way to the age-old shaming of the male, shaming him so that he shall step down, open the doors, lay his coat in the puddle and do all in his power so that women shall feel safe in these terribly masculine spaces.

For one can not lift women up without simultaneously pushing men down. Which is, oddly enough, what feminism believe all men do to all women. Also, does this mean feminists consider men superior to women? It certainly does not put men and women on a level playing-field, that much is certain.

If a feminist claims you to do something, it is something they themselves are guilty of doing. Their way of elevating women is to push men down. Thus, elevating men must necessarily mean pushing women down. To their eyes, and in their logic. If they create something for women, they keep men out. If MRA’s create a conference for men, for example, that must therefore mean that they keep women out. Despite all evidence to the contrary. The International Conference for Men’s Issues of 2019 is a good example of this, as the Woke Twitterati was all up in arms about this, even complaining that these foul MRA’s had women do their work for them, since women were the ones behind that particular conference.

Imagine treating women as equals, believing them absolutely capable of hosting a conference… oh, the horror! Women are not suited for that kind of work; that is the province of men. One would believe it to be celebrated by the frantic forces of feminism. Alas, no. As long as it is not female-centric and male-bashing, it is bad. No matter if it is men or women behind it.

Now, keeping men out is quite alright. Keeping women out is not. Women’s only spaces is quite alright. Men’s only spaces is sexist and misogynist. For the only thing men think about is women and keeping women out and down, according to feminism. Which is interesting, as this proves how they view men and how they talk about men and how they treat men. In painting this picture in their minds and in their philosophy of men as these terrible, beastly, oppressive and violent creatures, they can justify just about anything they do in “response” to these terrible, beastly, oppressive and violent acts of men being men as the feminists envision men being men to be. Which is not exactly how men are, but little mind, no matter.

And there come the empathy-gap.

The feminist view of men as a group is that of a terrible group, ripe with sexism and misogyny and rape and violence and all manner of cruel and unusual wickedness. Apparently, there is no problem in stating this outright as fact-without-a-doubt. Masculinity itself is a disease that must be tackled, dismantled, broken down and removed so that men can be more like women. Men are defective women, and boys are defective girls. Apparently, and according to their whims and bingo-wings.

Say the same thing about women as a group, and there will be no limits to the hate and scorn and ridicule and shame and smears and trials and tribulations one must wade through afterwards. And that in a society that simply hates women ever so much, and adores men ever so much. It makes no sense whatsoever. Except when viewed through the lenses of gynocentrism, which we are so enthralled with. Women are to be protected and treated with compassion. Men need not apply.

Now, I will freely and readily admit that I believe our societies do need more compassion… more neighbourly love, if you will. We are caught in the throes of narcissism and selfishness. More and more for every passing day, it seems, driven by the awesome might and influence and fury of social media-posturing and holier-than-thou sentiments.

Presenting pictures of compassion that is little more then self-aggrandizing displays of hollow and vacuous virtue, doing absolutely nothing but painting a phoney picture of oneself as a being of immaculate compassion and virtue, with egotism and narcissism hidden deep within the folds, thinly veiled by the clouds of self-sniffed farts.

What we do not need is more compassion to women and only women. Which is what we are driven towards, neglecting boys and men in the process.

Boys and men could absolutely do with more compassion, more understanding, more empathy for our plight than we are currently receiving. This is not to say, obviously, that I believe that our societies should drop everything else and care only for the plight of boys and men.

That would be ridiculous.

And quite contrary to anything I wish for.

I would, however, wish there would be an understanding that constantly bombarding boys and men with messages of our inherent wickedness, our cruelty and our malice, our moral and emotional deficiencies and so-and-such and on and on is nothing but cruelty. Cruelty wrapped in lies mimicking compassion and concern, (we must help men re-examine and dismantle their masculinities so that they shall be complete human beings) but cruelty nonetheless.

I would wish for a world in which boys and men and our struggles are granted more consideration than a giggle in contempt from high-ranking yet brain-dead politicians… that it would be given actual understanding and compassion, proper empathy… that it would be given solutions not dripping with feminist sick, proclaiming masculinity to be the cause of all our problems, as well as the cause of all the problems the world has ever seen – up to and including bad acts and deeds done by women.

Particularly so when masculinity is also the solution to all the woes and worries of the world. Both God and the Devil, given the responsibility for ruining society as well as the responsibility to fix it. For we can do nothing but wrong whilst simultaneously being expected to do nothing but absolute right.

To feminism – and to our societies overall – there is nothing to men but absolute good or absolute bad. The picture given us of men, in general, is nothing but a figment of fantasy. Stray but a little from the accepted path, and all is lost and forgotten… all achievements, all merits, all goodness and kindness and empathy you have proven time and again is swept away in an instant the moment you utter one thing – one thing – that may be construed, by the frail forces of fragile and frantic feminism, to be wrong-think, wrong-speak, wrong-this-that-or-the-other.

Men have to be absolute good, akin to godliness. It is an absolutely impossible standard of behaviour and conduct, enforced not by masculinity, but by the dogma of feminism and the gynocentric nature of humanity, where women must be protected from absolutely everything. Up to and including differences of opinion. For merely disagreeing with a feminist woman on one thing and one thing only is enough to label one a misogynist, a patriarchal oppressor, and all else there is to label one man as that is bad, wicked, cruel, tricksy and false. As is lending compliments to women on their appearance. As well as not lending compliments to women on their appearance, for that matter.

The black and white thinking on display is obvious; a man complimenting a woman on her appearance can not possibly mean anything but him not seeing anything in her but her appearance. A man’s thoughts on the matter means little to nothing.

Merely a light-hearted joke at the expense of women in general is considered strictly verboten; a proof of society and its inherent hostility towards women in general.

Despite jokes made at the expense of men being considered quite alright.

Despite calls for violence and death to all men being considered A-OK – made for prime-time television, in fact.

Despite painting boys, men and masculinity as defective, destructive, dangerous and violent being par for the course in the current cultural zeitgeist.

And so I wonder: if one joke at the expense of women in general is enough proof that our societies just hate women… what then would this constant belittlement of men prove? What would the constant hostility towards masculinity prove? What would the constant, the ongoing de-humanising of boys and men prove? What would the notion that there is something wrong with men due to them being men prove?

If applying the same logic, it would prove without a doubt that our societies simply does not care much for men, does not show any empathy toward men, does not have compassion for men. That our societies, in fact, adore women and, if not downright hate men, have very little care, compassion, empathy, understanding, love, honour, respect for men on the basis of their humanity. Men are not considered human beings, as much as we are considered human-doings. If we are to be celebrated, it is for something we do. Not for our humanity as-is. Empathy is non-existent. Though, of course, celebrating men for what we do is also wrong and something else to stroke the full fury of feminism with. For, did you not know that also women do things and so this must be celebrated. Not what men do.

And that is it for this ramble. Join me next year for more of my cruel and unusual rambling, lest my brain be filled with mulch and my pants filled with tiny rats and other such things, leading to only one possible conclusion in all that is, was and ever shall be: Epstein did not kill himself.

  • Please like, share and subscribe.
  • Moiret Allegiere, 14.12.2019

Lonely Trainstation Blues – Poetry for the Lost Boys, Kindle: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07ZB6K2JX
Lonely Trainstation Blues – Poetry for the Lost Boys, Paperback: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1692495518

Howling at a Slutwalk Moon, a collection of previous blog posts:
Vol 1 Paperback: https://www.amazon.com/dp/107571074X
Vol 1 Kindle: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TZTPDPR
Vol 2 Paperback: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1075714184
Vol 2 Kindle: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TZR25NL
Vol 1 Illustrated Paperback: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1075717094
Vol 2 Illustrated Paperback: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1075723078

Other links:
Redbubble shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Moiret/shop
Blog: https://moiretallegiere.wordpress.com/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3IaCxAXE3pQd7PCdvHoaaA
Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/EvbGZyTZSraY/
twatter: https://twitter.com/MAllegiere
Gab: https://gab.com/Moiret_Allegiere
Minds: https://www.minds.com/Moiret
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/people/152465815@N04/

Legg att eit svar

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com logo

Du kommenterer no med WordPress.com-kontoen din. Logg ut /  Endre )

Google photo

Du kommenterer no med Google-kontoen din. Logg ut /  Endre )

Twitter-bilde

Du kommenterer no med Twitter-kontoen din. Logg ut /  Endre )

Facebook-foto

Du kommenterer no med Facebook-kontoen din. Logg ut /  Endre )

Koplar til %s