For decades – at least since the 70’s – the feminist hive-mind have attempted to make the private political and the political private. (As well as attempting to dictate what we may or may not do with our privates in our own homes). I am sorry to say that they have succeeded.
That is to say: as long as it is the private lives of women and the experiences of women, it has come to fruition. Granted and mind you, this only ever applies if the women and their experiences go with the fallopian flow of the feminist ideology.
For a woman to have experiences countering the feminist narrative is an obscenity, when seen through the myopic lenses of feminism, all strange and weird and twisted and so-and-such. Her experiences are merely her experiences, and does as such not reflect the experiences of women at large. The experience of a feminist woman, however, is the experience of every woman everywhere, since time immemorial… some strange and hitherto unknown ancestral memory… stored in the genes, probably. At some point, the scientists will discover a feminist gene. And all shall be made clear and all will be understood.
The feminist experience of womanhood applies even to those women that have not experienced it. Those that have not experienced what the feminist women have experienced are blind to this experience on account of internalized misogyny or patriarchal influence or some other divine intervention, some hypnosis forced down her throat from the grand patriarch… mind-rape and other obscenities, one more obscene than the next.
The slaves are very complacent and content, you see.
And patriarchy appears to be a kind and tolerant master.
Also, the slaves have no other choice.
And so, we must listen to the experiences of (feminist) women and believe whatever a (feminist) woman has to say.
Even if it makes no sense.
Which is even more obvious.
When success is reached, one must then demand more. For if there is one thing and one thing only to be said about feminism, with absolute certainty, it is this: the show must go on. In order for it to constantly perpetuate itself, it must have an enemy and a cause to fight. And so goalposts are moved and everything changes from one day to the next. So the results from the battles of yesterday which were won must now be turned on its head and fought against. The results of the victories of yesteryear must therefore become the battle of the current year.
Which amuses me something awful.
Doubting my words?
Take a look at the history of the birth-control pill. How that came to be. Then take a look at feminist women complaining about the birth-control pill in this absurd and ridiculous current year of ours.
It is almost as though these women are merely looking to complain about something for the sake of being able to complain about something. It is a very interesting observation, even if I do say so myself. Victimhood is currency. And has been so for quite some time, longer than the current oppression Olympics, that’s for damned sure.
Not that any of this matters, of course, for internal contradictions and moving goalposts within the movement don’t matter, of course. Because there are approximately seventeen billion different forms and guises of feminism, each more delicate and prone to error than the last.
And really fucking convenient.
Were one so inclined, one would almost start believing that this claim is a mere smokescreen; a distraction from any and all form of criticism of the serpent-cult. “Well, my dude, that’s, like, not my feminism, my dude. So I’m not, like, answerable to that.”
Like, real convenient, my dudette, real convenient indeed.
One can not argue the point either, for her experience matters more than anything else. At the very least at this moment in time and for that experience and in that particular corner of insanity. Her experience of feminism is an experience of feminism as an ultimate good. And so it must be true, and all evidence to the contrary be damned. Up to and including calls to kill all men, which is from that part of the movement which is not real feminism… either that, or it is merely a joke – just as the “male tears” mugs, t-shirts and various and sundry is naught but a joke. Which would not bother me in the least, were it not for the blatant double standard of the thing. Men have lost their jobs for less than what a feminist spew from their face-orifice every two minutes or so.
And so, in that moment – at the moment of arguing a point – feminism becomes a staunch, hardcore, brutally individualistic movement. Until, that is, her experience is to be used as an example of the experience of all women everywhere. Then it becomes one of the most collectivist movements the world has ever seen. Collectivist when it suits them, individualist when it suits them. The experiences of women always matter and must always be believed. Excepting when they don’t matter and must be dismissed. Which is, as are all things, something feminism gets to decide.
This brings an interesting point to the whiplashed head-space of this humble wordsmith: what about the experiences of men?
To which the answer is as simple as it is stupid.
The experiences of men don’t matter.
For that is just the experience of that one man.
Also, he is probably full of lies and bullshit.
And so we do not need to listen to the experiences of men.
For men trade only in lies in order to enslave and subjugate women.
For even when men suffer and struggle, it is all about women.
For men think only about women, as is the natural order of things, given that everyone only ever think about women and everything is only ever about women and the experiences of women.
This, I suspect, is one of the reasons why every single discussion on men and the issues predominantly affecting men are hijacked by hordes of pissed-off women, feminist or not, proclaiming in loud and snarling voices that “what about the whamens?” For nothing can be discussed or said or stated or treated or seen or viewed or thought without including women. Even if it is as simple as celebrating fathers and the work that fathers do, women must be put first and always be included. The inverse does not apply.
When attempted, the feminist hordes screech that this is about women and that men always hijack every conversation. So get out of here with your man-spreaded man-splained man-terruptions and various other man-so-and-suches.
Projecting again, my dear?
Even when it has got fuck all to do with women, it has to be about women. That is exactly what the feminist stormtroopers do where the concerns of men are concerned; they hijack the conversation and derail it so that it has to do with women instead of men. And all and sundry support. For women receive empathy from both men and women, whereas men do not. To a ginormous extent. This, it has to be said, leaves no room and no space and no time and no place for any discussion about the personal experiences of men. Particularly not when the feminist hordes have lied and framed it in such a way that any discussion on the experiences of men and the issues men face are an attack on women overall.
This is quite bothersome.
See, I am a staunch believer in making people live by their own rules. The rules have to apply to everyone equally. That would be equality, you see.
Then, it goes without saying, if one is to listen to and believe the experiences of women without question, one must also listen to and believe the experiences of men. Without question.
Which no-one does, and which even less than no-one gives a flying fuck about. Those that do care are demonized for hating women… followed by attempts to shame them into silence and oblivion. For everything has to be about women. And men be damned, doubly-cursed and thrice-neglected for being so wicked as to believe that they matter just as much as women matter.
Unless, of course, it is from the experience of a feminist man and his struggles against his trademarked TOXIC MASCULINITY. Then he is to be hoisted to high heavens and celebrated in perpetuity for speaking truth to power and un-learning his maliciously misogynistic masculine matters.
Which is to say that he bends the knee and presents his balls, shaft, neck and mind to the feminist hive-mind and their undisputed ruler, ms Queen Bee Supreme. He is still not to be trusted, of course. But at the very least he is a better man than that man over there who has, as of yet, not disavowed his masculinity, his maleness and his supreme patriarchal power.
…Supreme patriarchal power and privilege which he supposedly has, even after being divorce-raped, after losing custody of his children to a vindictive ex, after three failed suicide attempts for reasons of homelessness on account of losing his job for failing to show up after a severe depression following family-court proceedings that will put him in jail soon enough for failing to pay both alimony and child-support for children he is not allowed to see any more on account of a vindictive ex. Not that his struggles matter either, for the feminist hive-mind have done their best in convincing the world that fathers do not matter in the lives of children; only mothers do. And the rest of the “village”. Everyone, in fact, except fathers, are important in the lives of children, according to the hive-mind.
That he can not pay for reasons of losing his job is irrelevant. When he goes to jail for failure to pay, it is even more difficult to get a job.
But this does not matter, for we do not need to listen to the experiences of men, nor do we need to show any understanding for their plight. All he has to do is pay up and shut up. He is not a living, breathing human being.
He is a dead-beat dad.
Reduced to ashes.
Though, admittedly, he is still needed for financial support.
For he has to take responsibility.
He’s just not allowed equal responsibility in raising his children.
But this don’t matter none.
Now, for those of us who have spent some time pondering and wondering issues such as the aforementioned, we have been told that it does not happen. Women are never vindictive or wicked. When men have no contact with their children, it is only ever because they are vindictive and wicked, not the other way around. Only men have the capacity for arseholery. Women do not. They are angelic and sacred creatures, and no woman would ever refuse the father of her children to see his children. It is only ever a father who would refuse to see his children. For fathers are deadbeats. All of them. Besides, women are better caretakers and so obviously they are the ones who should have full custody of the children, and her word should be law.
This line of thought implies that women are not human beings. It implies that women are some morally superior entity, one step above men on the evolutionary ladder. At least in the morality department.
And this is bullshit.
Just as men can be flawed, women can be flawed. And women using their children as a shield in divorce-court is not unheard of. Far from it.
But: we do not listen to the experiences of men, nor do we believe in the experiences of men. So when stories like these are told, they are either not heard or not believed. Speaking about it brings the feminist whip-crackers out in full force, ready to whip anyone into submission by claiming that pointing this out and speaking about it implies that this is something every woman does, and that this is something men say to subjugate, enslave and abuse women. Also: it is an attack on all women everywhere, and that is the worst one could possibly do. Women are a protected class, you’ve got to understand.
If a man fights for custody of his children, it must be because he is an abuser of women. He just wants to hurt the mother. It is never the other way around.
Divorce courts are heavily biased towards the mother, towards the woman. Much for reasons of feminist lobbying. Big and powerful feminist organizations fight against equal shared child-custody, on the basis that it hurts the mother and the child for mothers are the better caretakers. And other such nonsense.
Then the same feminists will claim that it is misogynistic of the courts to assume the mother to be the better caretaker, and so it really is the fault of men – that is the patriarchy – that fathers do not get equal custody rights.
Which is very interesting, and the best case I have ever seen of a self-fulfilling prophecy. As well as dubiously implemented hypocrisy. Though, of course, it does not matter. For that is one feminism, not the true feminism.
And the herp did derp.
As it is known to do.
And here I sat, thinking that the best course of action would be a default 50/50 shared parenting. That would be the most equal outcome. And to get rid of alimony, of course. For that is the most preposterous stupidity; the most bass ackwards thing to still be a thing in this tainted and fragmented current year of ours. Though, as one should well be aware of by now, equality – when spoken by feminism – does not equal equality.
I doubt any changes will be made or seen, unless the experiences of men are listened to and taken seriously. This is difficult to do. Because the experiences of men are so often shooed away and neglected as being of no importance when they are not pissed away as lies, fibs and bullshit designed only to hurt women. Because everything is only ever about women. Feminism has had decades of social engineering in which they have tricked our societies into believing that all men everywhere are extraordinary privileged. This makes it even more difficult. When this has been taught in schools – taught to children – it is not easy to unlearn. It becomes a baseline belief; a foundation for their worldview.
The apex-fallacy called. It wants its straw-man back. And its logical fallacy.
The above must necessarily lead to the experiences of men not being told. Who, in their right mind, would wish to share their experiences – their deeply personal, troubling and difficult experiences – when they are either waved away as lies and bullshit, or simply ignored by just about everyone? This is often the experience of men when trying to share their experience. Dismissed out of hand and outright waved away as lies. Or, of course, painted as an attack on women.
If you have not done so already, I would recommend grabbing a copy of the wonderful book “Sons of Feminism” (https://www.amazon.com/Sons-Feminism-Men-Have-Their/dp/1775081303), edited by the equally wonderful Janice Fiamengo. This is a collection of the personal experiences of men. It is a difficult book. As well as being a very good book. It is even inspiring and uplifting in ways which I can not properly explain. It is more of a felt sensation than a tangible and easily definable sensation. At least it was for me when I first read it. It is phenomenal, and it was a brilliant idea.
That book is one of the main reasons for me doing what I do, though there are quite a few reasons more – as there always is. This one kicked me over the edge, right out of my hibernation, one could say.
I believe that, if men’s rights are ever to be taken seriously, there is a need to talk about our experiences as men. The feminist hordes wanted to make the political private and the private political.
Which is a god-damned bother, in all honesty.
I have been in opposition to this nonsense for quite some time. Yet, it is what they did. And so maybe we ought to take them on their word and turn it about – to make them live by their own rules and their own wishes. To properly show that equality means exactly that: equality in all. That is to say: equal treatment. Equal treatment would then mean that the personal experiences of men is to be granted the same treatment that the personal experiences of women is granted. If not, feminism proves itself – yet again – to be a force for anything but equality.
Men need to talk about their feelings more, they say.
Then they attack, ridicule, smear and shame when we do.
I bathe in male tears, I drink male tears.
And other such misandrist piss-pottery.
Men must talk about their emotions!
I oppose the killing of all men, on the grounds that it is a disturbing thing to say and to do.
No, not like that.
Can’t even take a joke, lol, masculinity so fragile that I bathe in male tears.
Well, then, ignoring for a moment or two that men do, in fact, talk about their feelings and experiences (and would do so even more, were it not for feminism dismantling any and all male-only spaces on grounds of muh discrimination), albeit in a way and in a light not accepted by the feminist brigades and their mighty state of hysteria, I propose that men do.
That we speak openly and unashamed about our experiences in the feminist culture we inhabit; in the misandrist mass-media-manipulated moronic culture of ours, where equality only ever means whatever the feminist forces of frail and fragile femininity propose that it means.
Mind you: I am not proposing that men, in general, take part in the current climate of victim-culture; the woe-is-me fuckery that all and one are so engulfed and devoured by.
Far from it.
There is more than enough of that stupidity going around. If one has been a victim of something, the best thing one can do is to get over it and stop being a victim of it. One can never overcome something if one perpetually makes oneself a victim of it. Granted; for some people, I can see where the temptation lies.
It is far easier to live a life devoid of responsibility for anything, up to and including the course ones life has taken, by merely pointing to some victimhood and stating that this – and this alone – is the core reason for them fucking up at every turn. It is, at the very least, much easier, or, well, safer, than overcoming trauma and trials and tribulations. Overcoming trauma, trials and tribulations is excruciatingly hard work. Believe you me, I know. I have a handful – or more – of traumas myself, which I have spent quite some time overcoming. Some of which I have not yet gotten over.
I refuse, however, the cape of victimhood and the dunce-hat of the victim mentality. This does not mean that my story shall never be told, my experience never shared. For there is a difference in presenting a story and painting oneself as a perpetual victim.
What I propose is not the victim-culture shenanigans, but an honest, decent, rational and not least of all truthful sharing of our experiences within the feminist culture, within the misandrist male-bashing, male-hating culture.
The truth, such as the truth is. And nothing but that.
The more stories that are told and that are shared, the more it will have to be heard, until it can no longer be ignored. Until it has to be heard. Until it has to be shared and understood that not all is milk and honey in the land of men.
That it is, in fact, quite the contrary.
That, maybe, it is about damned time to give some due consideration to the plight of men; some understanding about what men go through and some empathy to boys and to men. That is not bloody god-damned fucking painted and presented in the tainted twat-light of feminism, wherein the biggest problem men have are their masculinity – their core nature, in fact.
I tell my own experiences on occasion, though I admit to often chickening out of it. For reasons of it being dismissed and waved away so easily. That is, however, what happens every time one goes against the feminist narrative. It is dismissed. For feminism is the word of the day, the dominant ideology and the most magnificent and most malicious church there ever was; great and terrible. And it helps both men and women, despite not being about helping men, except when it is about helping men as well, which is not now, but then, or there or not now, but after, and trickling down and much mulchy.
At some point, the truth will come out and reality will present itself. One can only hope that this will happen sooner rather than later; before it is considered illegal to speak such as we in this loosely knit movement do.
Considering that “misogyny” is proposed to become illegal in Great Britain – whatever the hell that means – and considering the rise of the hate speech laws, I am frightened that it will soon be considered misogyny to merely oppose feminism; that non-feminist writings, anti-feminist activities will be considered hate-speech and so become subject to penalties. Which would not surprise me. Those that can not win through honesty will win through suppression. Suppressing the freedom of people to speak their mind – as hate-speech laws do – is exactly that. Turning “misogyny” illegal could only ever mean deeming it illegal to oppose feminism. For misogyny, as we all well know, means whatever a feminist says that it means. And this includes attacks on feminism. For feminism has turned feminism into a term that means “women”, not the ideology of feminism. Just as equality means whatever the hell a feminist says that it does in the heat of the moment, misogyny means whatever the hell a feminist says that it does in the heat of the moment.
And misandry, on the other hand, does not real and is not hateful. For if that was to be made illegal – which I do not for one second propose that it should be, except if misogyny is made illegal – feminists would not be allowed their platform of speech. For they do think about and talk about men all the bloody time, even when they claim that they don’t.
And that is that for this particular radical and rebellious ramble. I hope you enjoyed it. Join me next week, if you so please, for more of why I am an anti-feminist. It is closing in on the end for this particular series, I believe. What the future holds will be interesting, I hope.
- Please Like, Share and Subscribe
- Moiret Allegiere, 11.01.2019
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
Redbubble shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Moiret/shop