It would have been helpful if you had framed this as how so-called feminism was taken over by the CIA or what not, like every other movement. Having grown up just as women were ALLOWED to have a voice in anything at all and women created safe spaces for the billions of women being abused by their husbands, brothers, uncles, priests, etc., actual/real feminism is about being liberated from the control of men and there was a quite extreme need for that then and even more so now. What passes for feminism in the mainstream has absolutely NOTHING to do with real feminism. Real feminists have been pounding away at the trans/mens rights movement for decades and you would know this if you did any REAL research on feminism. Like all isms, things get twisted and warped and there will always be people who manipulate things so that the original purpose/need for something becomes a joke, like young women doing the "slut walk" on International Women's Day which makes feminism into a farce. Killing a child at birth or near birth is not abortion (which is absolutely required by billions of women who are raped by their fathers and other violent men and women who live with men who rape their children) and the latest craze to kill children is all part of the Nazi regime we have been living under for quite some time. I'm really shocked to see this very unthoughtful piece by you and severely disappointed. Again, women are responsible for all the evils of the world and so we should just kick women's rights to the curb because we just don't know how to be good humans, right?
hola, zoë. thank you for reading and for commenting.
i didn't say that. although, the 'tone' of your response, a kind of weak feminist-like attack, points to your being a nafalt. you may find listening to jaye cassie's ted talk, that i linked in the essay worth while. and perhaps karen straughan's nafalt talk too: https://youtu.be/AQWoNhrY_fM
more to the point, is you have done exactly what cassie describes herself as doing when listening to men criticising the power that feminism has to casually and indifferently destroy men's lives: which is to turn that into women's problem. i suggest you watch the cassie jaye tedx. she describes well her becoming aware of how she did that same thing: not hear anything except with the feminist twisting of the language in order to make the female the victim. and maybe watch the red pill documentary as well.
what i have said is that the origins of feminism were misandristic and occult. that it began with bad intentions and has not ever had good intentions. that all of its 'good' points are based on partial truths, lies of omission, and outright lies. and that i think that the original malevolent intentions have devolved into the almost gleeful killing of unborn life — abortion celebrations for example, and the open advocacy of male genocide as a social good.
feminists announce how happy they are with that and do not every speak out against it. conversely, when people, women or men do openly question some of these 'feminist' values, the feminist power condemns them even into death at times — male or female. consider what happened to errin prizzie in britain. in the early 70s she was threatened with death by the feminists for noticing that women in the women's shelter that she opened — britains' first — had as much proclivity to resort to physical violence as men. under threat of death by 'non-violent' compassionate caring nurturing female feminists — who easily kill their unborn babies — she eventually left britain under the legitimate concern that the feminists were a threat to her life.
and you of course mention rape, the typical feminist lie, because that situation accounts for maybe 1% of all abortions, if that. so, a lie.
i have also inferred in my essay that the desire of women to not want to be beaten up has been a ruse used by feminism to paint over its evil with that mask of goodness. not once do feminists talk about the rates of female to male violence, let alone the rapes of boy and men by women. why? because that is not a 'feminist' issue. it goes against the feminist narrative and would reveal the false foundation on which that lie rests.
since becoming aware of this 'fact' of domestic violence, and that female to female domestic violence is *far far* greater than male to female violence — which feminists quickly deny — when i have mentioned this fact to men i know, many of them have admitted to having been physically attacked by women. and not told anyone. if a man speaks up the feminists then say 'oh, poor boy. man up' and deny that that is a 'real' problem. and often rationalise it as he deserves it, the same rationale they use to descry that rationalisation of male to female violence. the hypocrisy of feminism as as big as any i've seen.
initially in my investigation into feminism it struck me as bizarre how lacking compassion women are. i had been under the feminist spell. again, a simple example is the killing full term babies as if it is a non-event. and the importance of genital mutilation as a good thing and the genocide of men and the refusal to acknowledge that men are victims of rape and domestic violence as well.
now, i don't know you; my guess, based on your odd nafalt-like reaction, is that you will not be able to understand what i said, because you will not feel compassion to men and will dismiss this story as less important than the 'real' victim and the 'real' abuser. perhaps even irrelevant to keep the feminist narrative alive, because you didn't really argue against what i wrote and instead, typically, cite what are at best feminist half-truth tropes. that being, of course, the typical and effective marxist narrative — oops, i mean lie or hide the lie in something almost truth-like.
if you want to challenge your false preconceptions about violence and death and the feminist narrative, watch this really engaged discussion between a man and a woman:
ps, i am aware of the infiltration by the cia of NOW, in particular and the overall scope of '2nd wave' feminism, with their agent/asset gloria steinem. my essay was already long enough without that thread.
My life experience and knowledge is not weak and is not a trope. I can't believe the language you're using. I cited reasons why women need to have support from male violence that I witnessed every day of my life and every other single woman I know. I said nothing about "feminist values" whatever the hell that is. You are generalizing and using conservative talking points and stereotypes. I would never say ALL women are great - there's no such thing 'cause neither are ALL men great. Women can be just as vicious and retarded as men and often are. This is way beneath your abilities in my opinion. I am not now nor have I ever been focussed on destroying men's lives. OMG, so dramatic and juvenile. Good luck on your mission - I'll let myself out. Also, who the hell do you think you are saying I have false preconceptions about violence and death and the feminist narrative. Holy shit. What has happened to you I wonder?
synchronicity? women in india now killing men without consequence?
i turned on a video by christine grace smith and someone sent her some details on the rising epidemic in india of men being killed by their wives without legal consequence. hmmmm. would feminism have inspired them, with all the misandrist rhetoric? of course not. but the legal system hasn't been corrupted by feminism, of course. hmmmmm.
yes, there are some generalisation here, almost as many as there are from you, though.
men and women are both capable of and do horrific stuff. yes. not once have i seen, so far, a feminist actually stand up and apologise on behalf of that. men, on the other hand, do it a lot.
i understand that very likely you haven't focused on destroying men's lives. did you read the essay? the overtly stated mission of the feminists, all the way back to 1848 was that exact thing. so, i wasn't saying you; just the organisation you belong to, though. undoubtedly you like most 'feminists' are unaware that the organisation they align with is founded in misandry and the destruction of the family.
question, is the family healthier now after x numbers of years of feminism, than before? or worse? are male female relations better or worse now than before feminism? feminism has created a history that misrepresents both the good and bad stuff of men and women and their relationships in history.
It would have been helpful if you had framed this as how so-called feminism was taken over by the CIA or what not, like every other movement. Having grown up just as women were ALLOWED to have a voice in anything at all and women created safe spaces for the billions of women being abused by their husbands, brothers, uncles, priests, etc., actual/real feminism is about being liberated from the control of men and there was a quite extreme need for that then and even more so now. What passes for feminism in the mainstream has absolutely NOTHING to do with real feminism. Real feminists have been pounding away at the trans/mens rights movement for decades and you would know this if you did any REAL research on feminism. Like all isms, things get twisted and warped and there will always be people who manipulate things so that the original purpose/need for something becomes a joke, like young women doing the "slut walk" on International Women's Day which makes feminism into a farce. Killing a child at birth or near birth is not abortion (which is absolutely required by billions of women who are raped by their fathers and other violent men and women who live with men who rape their children) and the latest craze to kill children is all part of the Nazi regime we have been living under for quite some time. I'm really shocked to see this very unthoughtful piece by you and severely disappointed. Again, women are responsible for all the evils of the world and so we should just kick women's rights to the curb because we just don't know how to be good humans, right?
hola, zoë. thank you for reading and for commenting.
i didn't say that. although, the 'tone' of your response, a kind of weak feminist-like attack, points to your being a nafalt. you may find listening to jaye cassie's ted talk, that i linked in the essay worth while. and perhaps karen straughan's nafalt talk too: https://youtu.be/AQWoNhrY_fM
more to the point, is you have done exactly what cassie describes herself as doing when listening to men criticising the power that feminism has to casually and indifferently destroy men's lives: which is to turn that into women's problem. i suggest you watch the cassie jaye tedx. she describes well her becoming aware of how she did that same thing: not hear anything except with the feminist twisting of the language in order to make the female the victim. and maybe watch the red pill documentary as well.
what i have said is that the origins of feminism were misandristic and occult. that it began with bad intentions and has not ever had good intentions. that all of its 'good' points are based on partial truths, lies of omission, and outright lies. and that i think that the original malevolent intentions have devolved into the almost gleeful killing of unborn life — abortion celebrations for example, and the open advocacy of male genocide as a social good.
feminists announce how happy they are with that and do not every speak out against it. conversely, when people, women or men do openly question some of these 'feminist' values, the feminist power condemns them even into death at times — male or female. consider what happened to errin prizzie in britain. in the early 70s she was threatened with death by the feminists for noticing that women in the women's shelter that she opened — britains' first — had as much proclivity to resort to physical violence as men. under threat of death by 'non-violent' compassionate caring nurturing female feminists — who easily kill their unborn babies — she eventually left britain under the legitimate concern that the feminists were a threat to her life.
and you of course mention rape, the typical feminist lie, because that situation accounts for maybe 1% of all abortions, if that. so, a lie.
i have also inferred in my essay that the desire of women to not want to be beaten up has been a ruse used by feminism to paint over its evil with that mask of goodness. not once do feminists talk about the rates of female to male violence, let alone the rapes of boy and men by women. why? because that is not a 'feminist' issue. it goes against the feminist narrative and would reveal the false foundation on which that lie rests.
since becoming aware of this 'fact' of domestic violence, and that female to female domestic violence is *far far* greater than male to female violence — which feminists quickly deny — when i have mentioned this fact to men i know, many of them have admitted to having been physically attacked by women. and not told anyone. if a man speaks up the feminists then say 'oh, poor boy. man up' and deny that that is a 'real' problem. and often rationalise it as he deserves it, the same rationale they use to descry that rationalisation of male to female violence. the hypocrisy of feminism as as big as any i've seen.
initially in my investigation into feminism it struck me as bizarre how lacking compassion women are. i had been under the feminist spell. again, a simple example is the killing full term babies as if it is a non-event. and the importance of genital mutilation as a good thing and the genocide of men and the refusal to acknowledge that men are victims of rape and domestic violence as well.
now, i don't know you; my guess, based on your odd nafalt-like reaction, is that you will not be able to understand what i said, because you will not feel compassion to men and will dismiss this story as less important than the 'real' victim and the 'real' abuser. perhaps even irrelevant to keep the feminist narrative alive, because you didn't really argue against what i wrote and instead, typically, cite what are at best feminist half-truth tropes. that being, of course, the typical and effective marxist narrative — oops, i mean lie or hide the lie in something almost truth-like.
if you want to challenge your false preconceptions about violence and death and the feminist narrative, watch this really engaged discussion between a man and a woman:
Jeff St James | The Sitdown
https://www.youtube.com/live/UnRp1_TNy5U
ps, i am aware of the infiltration by the cia of NOW, in particular and the overall scope of '2nd wave' feminism, with their agent/asset gloria steinem. my essay was already long enough without that thread.
My life experience and knowledge is not weak and is not a trope. I can't believe the language you're using. I cited reasons why women need to have support from male violence that I witnessed every day of my life and every other single woman I know. I said nothing about "feminist values" whatever the hell that is. You are generalizing and using conservative talking points and stereotypes. I would never say ALL women are great - there's no such thing 'cause neither are ALL men great. Women can be just as vicious and retarded as men and often are. This is way beneath your abilities in my opinion. I am not now nor have I ever been focussed on destroying men's lives. OMG, so dramatic and juvenile. Good luck on your mission - I'll let myself out. Also, who the hell do you think you are saying I have false preconceptions about violence and death and the feminist narrative. Holy shit. What has happened to you I wonder?
synchronicity? women in india now killing men without consequence?
i turned on a video by christine grace smith and someone sent her some details on the rising epidemic in india of men being killed by their wives without legal consequence. hmmmm. would feminism have inspired them, with all the misandrist rhetoric? of course not. but the legal system hasn't been corrupted by feminism, of course. hmmmmm.
What HAPPENS When FEMINISM Goes Wrong
https://youtu.be/pyJzWOADpWM
hola zoë.
yes, there are some generalisation here, almost as many as there are from you, though.
men and women are both capable of and do horrific stuff. yes. not once have i seen, so far, a feminist actually stand up and apologise on behalf of that. men, on the other hand, do it a lot.
i understand that very likely you haven't focused on destroying men's lives. did you read the essay? the overtly stated mission of the feminists, all the way back to 1848 was that exact thing. so, i wasn't saying you; just the organisation you belong to, though. undoubtedly you like most 'feminists' are unaware that the organisation they align with is founded in misandry and the destruction of the family.
question, is the family healthier now after x numbers of years of feminism, than before? or worse? are male female relations better or worse now than before feminism? feminism has created a history that misrepresents both the good and bad stuff of men and women and their relationships in history.
all the best.