'Men's Rights' et al communities becoming more extreme

Watch
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#21
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#21
In light of the recent terror attack in Germany, this piece from 2019 is relevant.

The misogyny of terrorism:

https://medium.com/@WillBaldet/the-m...m-e253474b59d5

Those who study or work in the field of counter terrorism will have seen instances where violence against women and violent extremism appear intrinsically linked.

A recent book, Home Grown: How Domestic Violence Turns Men Into Terrorists, explores this theme in forensic detail. Its author, Joan Smith, is a feminist writer and co-chair of the London Mayor’s violence against women and girls board. In her book, Smith notes that the Westminster Bridge terrorist Khalid Masood was guilty of controlling and beating a succession of women behind closed doors. One wife endured such abuse at his hands that she ran away from the marriage after only three months.
Far-right terrorist Darren Osborne, who emulated Masood’s vehicle-borne attack, had a conviction for actual bodily harm against his female partner. Smith asserts that Osborne had shown no interest at all in right-wing ideology until she threw him out of the family home in Cardiff shortly before the attack.
It is notable that the most recent threats to UK politicians have manifested against female MPs. Both Luciana Berger and Rosie Cooper have been the subject of threats to kill by white supremacists, and in 2016 we witnessed the horrific murder of Jo Cox by Nazi-obsessed terrorist Thomas Mair. Ruth Smeeth MP has received threats from far-right, far-left and Islamist extremists, including threats to behead her.
The Radio 4 series Beyond Today looks at this particular trend of extremist threats to women, including those against Ruth Smeeth, noting that some of the neo-Nazi online discussions include forums dedicated to rape and lionising serial killers such as Ted Bundy and Charles Manson, notorious for their torture, sexual abuse and murder of women.

Misogyny and Nazism are not strangers. Germany’s Third Reich subscribed to the doctrine of Kuche Kirche Kinder — relegating the role of women to attending church, being in the kitchen and having children. This antiquated suppression of a woman’s role in society is adopted by many of today’s adherents to neo-Nazi ideology.

Former Chief Crown Prosecutor Nazir Afzal recognises the links between misogynist violence and terrorism, highlighting that “the first victim of an extremist or terrorist is the woman in his own home.” He points out that with 25,000 men on the radar of police and the security services as potential terrorist threats, “You can’t monitor 25,000. But you shouldn’t have to. You already know which ones to target by flagging up violence against women as a high-risk factor.”

Salman Abedi, the Manchester Arena bomber, had previously punched a female student in the head for wearing a skirt he deemed too short. He took his misogyny to an horrific level when he subsequently targeted an Ariana Grande pop concert guaranteed to be attended by young girls. Consequently, of Abedi’s 22 victims, 17 were female.

The Nigerian terrorist group, Boko Haram, is so opposed to the education of women they kidnapped hundreds of Nigerian schoolgirls and forced them into sexual slavery. Visiting Chad and Niger, United Nations Deputy Secretary‑General Amina Mohammed noted that gender inequality and attacks on women’s rights are a core part of terrorist groups’ strategy and ISIS revelled in the brutal rape and slavery of Yazidi women and girls, trading them as commodities. Human Rights Watch identified that in Syria both ISIS and AQ-linked Jabhat al-Nusra were undermining the freedoms that Syria’s women enjoyed and “focused on diminishing freedom for women and girls.”

Closer to home, the London Bridge terrorists subscribed to the ideology of ISIS and at the time of their attack in 2017, the abuse of women and subjugation of their rights by ISIS was well-known to the world. Whether they were willing to turn a blind eye to ISIS’ rampant misogyny or at worst were wholly supportive of it is a moot point, both demonstrate utter contempt for women.

One NGO tackling extremism in Serbia has gone to great lengths to understand the social attitudes of the men referred to them, including their views on women and gender equality. They found that 78% of families with known extremists in the community were also suffering from gender-based violence.

The UK’s counter-radicalisation strategy, Prevent, will address whatever underlying issues have led a person to adopt terrorist narratives, whether social factors, psychological fractures or ideological drivers, and this would include factors like misogyny where pertinent.

In one case of radicalisation I worked on, a 14 year old pupil with increasingly far-right views first came to the attention of his teachers after he made threats to assault and rape female members of staff. The ensuing safeguarding referral uncovered drawings of female pupils being mutilated and a volatile and fractured relationship with his mother.

My intuition is that the highly personal process of radicalisation involves such a complex interaction of internal and external drivers, that misogyny will play a role for some terrorists; arguably, the Gamergate furore was a pre-cursor to the online culture that bred the Christchurch terrorist Brenton Tarrant, and the emergence of the Incel movements must surely be the most acute manifestation of the nexus between misogyny and terrorism.

Further research is needed to identify any causal links and evidence these apparent correlations, but those ideologies which promote archaic divisions in gender roles, particularly stark in Islamist extremism and neo-Nazism, appear more prone to this toxic relationship.

It seems to me that if we casually reject the connections between violence against women and violent extremism there is a real danger we trivialise misogyny’s role in terrorism’s wider context and risk placing it as solely emblematic rather than a potential driver of radicalisation.

Joan Smith argues that if we start to explore the links between terrorism and domestic violence we might just stop the next attack. This may be an optimistic view, and tackling misogyny is something that needs to be woven into the very fabric of our society and not become yet another lens through which to view counter terrorism, but to reject the growing association within certain ideologies of violence against women and violent extremism may prove to be naive.
0
reply
Kitten in boots
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 month ago
#22
The link between the manosphere and the far right are sadly clear to all. Sadly the events I Germany only reinforce this.

Many of the lone wolf Islsmic attacks on Euro over the last few years have been committed by Islamists who have had really destructive relationships with women or have had no relationships.

The bitterness that comes from being an utter failure of a man seems to push losers towards extremism.
0
reply
furzisulta
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 month ago
#23
(Original post by Pinkisk)
...
pinkisk you fkin madlad
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 month ago
#24
(Original post by Pinkisk)
We've had a lot of terror attacks perpetrated by feminists far worse than that "incel bloke"...but these attacks do not receive publicity and when they do those reporting on them do their utmost to avoid ascribing the attacks to feminism.
So can you tell us what they are? But first, a reminder of what Incels have done in the span of about 5 years:

Elliot Rodger - killed 6 people
Chris Harper-Mercer - killed 9 people
Sheldon Bentley - stomped a security guard to death
William Atchison - Killed 2
Nikolas Cruz - killed 17 people
Alek Minassian - killed 10 people
Scott Beierle - killed 3 people
And most recently Tobias Rathjen - killed 10 people

So far you've mentioned Valerie Sonas, who killed nobody and was diagnosed a paranoid schizophrenic; The Angry Group, whose actions led to a single person being 'slightly injured'; and a snippet from an obscure feminist mag from about a million years ago that mostly details incidents of women acting in self-defence. "Thousands of examples". ****ing sure, mate.

Un-****ing-believable the number of people in this thread eating your nonsense up.
Last edited by Captain Haddock; 1 month ago
5
reply
Justvisited
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 month ago
#25
(Original post by Kitten in boots)
The bitterness that comes from being an utter failure of a man seems to push losers towards extremism.
When you come to think about it, that's hardly surprising, in any context. How do you think the French Revolution happened?

How would you define a "loser" man?

Then, how would you define a "loser" woman?
0
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 month ago
#26
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
So can you tell us what they are? But first, a reminder of what Incels have done in the span of about 5 years:

Elliot Rodger - killed 6 people
Chris Harper-Mercer - killed 9 people
Sheldon Bentley - stomped a security guard to death
William Atchison - Killed 2
Nikolas Cruz - killed 17 people
Alek Minassian - killed 10 people
Scott Beierle - killed 3 people
And most recently Tobias Rathjen - killed 10 people

So far you've mentioned Valerie Sonas, who killed nobody and was diagnosed a paranoid schizophrenic; The Angry Group, whose actions led to a single person being 'slightly injured'; and a snippet from an obscure feminist mag from about a million years ago that mostly details incidents of women acting in self-defence. "Thousands of examples". ****ing sure, mate.

Un-****ing-believable the number of people in this thread eating your nonsense up.
You strongly come across like you will do your utmost to justify and trivialise any example of violence given to you. Examples are a waste of time on you. You are not in this looking for the truth. You are in this because you blindly follow a movement about which, I am willing to guarantee everything I have, that you know little if anything at all.

Oh Valerie Solanas was crazy? Hmmm...maybe you ought to tell this to mainstream feminist icon Professor Avital Ronell who thought she was a genius on the level of the greatest philosophers of the 20th century comparing her to Jacques Derrida. You write that she is crazy in a reply to a comment on a thread on the same page of which there are three or four videos celebrating her as an icon and a hero that's how blind and deliberately contrived your reply is.

Please also stop resorting to vitriol in your comments.

Furthermore, what is an incel? Is it an ideological group with particular teachings about which we can generalise like feminism? nope.

...but yeah, here's another example of a violent feminist ...this one involved in genocide.

Aung San Suu Kyi, a feminist icon, currently involved in a genocide against ethnic minorities in Myanmar. Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced by her armies. Tens of thousands have been raped and murdered.


Incels? Incels are small fry compared to feminists.

By the way this example is not for you. Don't bother replying. I do not care to read more of your hapless attempts at trivialisation, justification nonsense. You are evidence that feminism is dangerous. You refuse to recognise that your ideology suffers from very serious problems with racism, sexism and violence. As such, you are part of the problem.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 1 month ago
0
reply
Johnny Tightlips
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 month ago
#27
(Original post by Pinkisk)
You strongly come across like you will do your utmost to justify and trivialise any example of violence given to you. Examples are a waste of time on you. You are not in this looking for the truth. You are in this because you blindly follow a movement about which, I am willing to guarantee everything I have, that you know little if anything at all.

Oh Valerie Solanas was crazy? Hmmm...maybe you ought to tell this to mainstream feminist icon Professor Avital Ronell who thought she was a genius on the level of the greatest philosophers of the 20th century comparing her to Jacques Derrida. You write that she is crazy in a reply to a comment on a thread on the same page of which there are three or four videos celebrating her as an icon and a hero that's how blind and deliberately contrived your reply is.

Please also stop resorting to vitriol in your comments.

Furthermore, what is an incel? Is it an ideological group with particular teachings about which we can generalise like feminism? nope.

...but yeah, here's another example of a violent feminist ...this one involved in genocide.

Aung San Suu Kyi, a feminist icon, currently invoelde in a genocide against ethnic minorities in Myanmar. Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced. Tens of thousands have been raped.


Incels? Incels are small fry compared to feminists.

By the way this example is not for you. Don't bother replying. I do not care to read more of your trivialisation, justification and more of your nonsense. You are evidence that feminism is dangerous. You refuse to recognise that your ideology has very serious problems with racism, sexism and violence. As such, you are part of the problem. No go bother someone else with your childish replies.
You think the Rohingya crisis is happening because Suu Kyi is a feminist? F8ck me. It has zero to do with men-hating.
Until feminists kill more people than incels your arguments mean jack.
And incels are an ideological group if not as formalised.
Last edited by Johnny Tightlips; 1 month ago
1
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 month ago
#28
(Original post by Johnny Tightlips)
You think the Rohingya crisis is happening because Suu Kyi is a feminist? F8ck me. It has nothing to do with men-hating.
Until feminists kill more people than incels your arguments mean jack.
And incels are an ideological group if not as formalised.
Feminism is a marxist communist ideology much more than just about men. Its an ideology that pursues power and control, an ideology that justifies and trivialises hate, violence and corruption rife within its midst to reach its goal.
0
reply
Johnny Tightlips
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 month ago
#29
(Original post by Pinkisk)
Feminism is a marxist communist ideology much more than just about men. Its an ideology that pursues power and control, an ideology that justifies and trivialises hate, violence and corruption rife within its midst to reach its goal.
No it isn't. That's like saying Islam is about terrorism.
0
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 month ago
#30
Some replies on here are stating that incels are bad....but what are incels? a group of female and male involuntary celibates. What would you think if i told you feminism has within it a prominent branch that is identical in many ways to incels, but far worse, a branch that isn't involuntarily celibate but voluntarily so and full of hate and loathing.

Have you ever heard of feminist separatists? If you haven't here's an article you might find interesting about a feminist movie recently released in Canada celebrating feminist separatism:

"The Misandrists by feminist and Canadian film maker Bruce La Bruce.

This movie, when it was first released in 2017



The Misandrists, tells you all that you need to know about its story and its content. Misandry is a term used to describe the hatred of men and the word misandrists refers to people who hate men. This movie is a depiction and a celebration of this hatred found in feminism.

The movie who’s main cast is entirely feminist tells the story of a feminist separatist commune with hopes to change the world. Now, for those of you not familiar with feminist separatist communes, these are places that feminists have been creating around the world since the early 1970s, where men are not allowed and where women are indoctrinated in lesbianism and feminism. One example of such communes is the Susan B. Anthony Women’s Land Trust (About SuBAMUH (https://subamuh.wordpress.com/exploring-subamuh/)) found in the US. Another example is SuperShe, a feminist separatist island found in the Baltic Sea (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/13/finl...allow-men.html).

Another example of these separatist, male-free, feminist utopias is the Jinwar. This is a women-only village created, by western feminist NGOs in collaboration with armed Kurdish communist groups responsible for many atrocities, in war torn Syria. Welcome to Jinwar, a women-only village in Syria that wants to smash the patriarchy (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...m_source=quora).

So, these separatist communes are very real. They are not isolated to the west, but are found across the globe. Feminists have been writing about them for decades, in hundreds of books describing their ideal world, a world ruled by women, free of men. The Herland Trilogy, The Female Man, Woman on the Edge of Time, The Power, The Kanshou and The Magister are just but a few examples of these books.

In the Misandrists the separatist commune is run by a woman named Big Mother (a feminist term pervasive throughout feminist literature used to describe women of authority, feminist Goddesses and sometimes the Earth). Big Mother, played by German feminist actress Susanne Sachße, wants to impose a feminist matriarchy on the world through separatism.

**What is separatism?**

Briefly, feminism preaches the idea that we live in a world run by a system it calls *The Patriarchy*, a system created by men to objectify and enslave women for the benefit of men. Feminist doctrine claims that one way in which *The Patriarchy* objectifies women is through heterosexuality, which it claims is not a natural practice but a social construct imposed on women by men. Men, according to feminist doctrine, use heterosexual relationships as a means of power and control over women by means of romance and intercourse. Prominent feminists have likened romance to rape. Take Andrea Dworkin, this woman described by feminists as an icon, an inspiration and a legend (INSPIRE: Andrea Dworkin – Behind The Myth - The Heroine Collective (http://www.theheroinecollective.com/...hind-the-myth/)), as an example:

“Romance (Andrea claimed) is rape embellished with meaningful looks.” in a speech given by herself in a “Take Back the Night” feminist rally in 1980.

In the 1970s icon of feminism Jill Johnston, in a book she titled Lesbian Nation, The Feminist Solution (a term she borrowed from the Nazi ideology for its solution to the problem of the Jews), she offered a solution to problems claimed by feminists of *The Patriarchy. *She called this solution separatism i.e. the complete separation of women from men in society on all levels through the pursuit of lesbianism.

*“All women are lesbians, except those who don’t know it naturally. They are but don’t know it yet. I am a woman and, therefore, a lesbian. I am a woman who is a lesbian because I am a woman, and a woman who loves herself naturally who, with other women, is a lesbian. A woman who loves women, loves herself. Naturally, this is the case. A woman is herself is all woman, is a natural-born lesbian, so we don’t mind using the name. Like any name it is quite meaningless. It means naturely [Sic]. I am a woman and whatever I am, we are. We affirm being what we are, the way, of course, all men are homosexuals. Being, having a more sense of their homo: their homo-ness, their ecce homo-ness. Their ecce prince and more than master-ness … to be equal we have to become who we really are. As women we will never be equal women until we love one another. Especially from the White House. The President of the United States last night announced the appointment of a lesbian to his cabinet. We’re getting to the bottom of women’s lib. We’re going down on women’s lib… the new thing that’s happening is the withdrawal of women to give to each other their own sense of self. Until women see in each other the possibility of a primal commitment, which includes sexual love, they will be denying themselves the love and value they readily accord to men. Thus affirming their second-class status. Until all women are lesbians there will be no true political revolution…”* Wrote Ms Johnston in *Lesbian Nation: The Feminist Solution*.
These ideas became an integral part of feminism.

*“Our rejection of heterosexual sex challenges male domination in its most individual and common form. We offer all women something better than submission to personal oppression. We offer the beginning of the end of collective and individual male supremacy… Lesbianism is the key to liberation and only women who cut their ties to male privilege can be trusted to remain serious in the struggle against male dominance.” *Wrote feminist Dee Graham in *Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men’s Violence, and Women’s Lives*, in 1994.

Women within the feminist movement who publicly apposed separatism became labelled *Phallic Women* by feminists, women who serve male interests. Many such women became the victims of violence, censorship and ostracisation. Separatism through this violence, ostracisation and censorship typical of proponents of the feminist movement became greatly empowered. It went on to greatly influence feminism in its entirety:

*“It is my belief that without us, feminism would never have been more than a caucus of the broad Left. Separatism was right there in the middle, influencing all women… What we separatists did was to reduce the very complex set of circumstances which combine to oppress women, to a single uncluttered issue. That is the stark injustice of the total humiliation of women on all levels by men.”* Wrote feminist journalist Angela Neustatter of feminist separatism, in *Hyenas in Petticoats*, in 1998.

Now, in this movie Big Mother seeks to impose a Matriarchy on the world by promoting feminist separatism and lesbianism through the spread of lesbian pornography and by, of course, murdering men whenever and wherever possible.

This following passage demonstrates an example of the repugnancy found throughout this movie. It involves a heated discussion between two feminists belonging to the commune:

Feminist 1: *Don’t you like living in a separatist stronghold?*

Feminist 2: *Of course I do! Men are despicable and abominable. They are the pigs of the world!!!*

Feminist 1: *Now, lets leave pigs out of this.*

Feminist 2: *Not that kind of pigs. I mean, they are the cops of the world. They should all be dragged out into the streets and ritually sodomised…Facist’s!!!*

Feminist 1: *Calm down.*

Feminist 2: *I am getting so tired of waiting!!! waiting, waiting, waiting… Women have been waiting for an eternity. When are we going to posit ourselves authentically as Subjects?!! *(Subjects is a communist term referring to people who rule the world by means of objectifying other classes).

Feminist 1: *You have to be patient. Big Mother knows what she is doing.*

This following passage taken from another part of the movie involves a discussion between Big Mother and a male feminist begging for his life by trying to convince feminists of the commune that he is supportive of their cause:
Big Mother: *Let me womansplain something to you… You should know that our struggle is not for parity in a corrupt system, but against men in general.*
Feminists of the commune: *Blessed be the Goddess of all worlds that has not made me a man!*

This is shortly followed by Big Mother stripping this male feminist naked with the help of feminists within the commune before castrating him alive and tearing him apart with a surgical knife. The movie shows the castration in all its detail.

The feminists go on to start an armed struggle where they impose their ways on the world and everyone lives happily ever after.

One review written by a feminist about this feminist movie describes it as being anti-feminist! Why? Well, not because it is sexist against men but because this feminist reviewer took great offence from feminists within the movie for not castrating and murdering the man earlier on in the movie than they did. She called this feminist movie anti-feminist because the feminists in the movie didn’t kill the man sooner than they did in the film…:
9 Reasons Why Antifeminist Propaganda 'The Misandrists' Will Make You Want to Bleach Your Eyes - AfterEllen (https://www.afterellen.com/entertain...each-your-eyes)

Now, having read all of this, do you think feminism is in any position to criticise incels or MGTOW or any other type of separatist group? yeah...no.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 1 month ago
0
reply
Johnny Tightlips
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 month ago
#31
(Original post by Pinkisk)
Some replies on here are stating that incels are bad....but what are incels? a group of female and male involuntary celibates. What would you think if i told you feminism has within it a prominent branch that is identical in many ways to incels, but far worse, a branch that isn't involuntarily celibate but voluntarily so and full of hate and loathing.

Have you ever heard of feminist separatists? If you haven't here's an article you might find interesting about a feminist movie recently released in Canada celebrating feminist separatism:

"The Misandrists by feminist and Canadian film maker Bruce La Bruce.

This movie, when it was first released in 2017



The Misandrists, tells you all that you need to know about its story and its content. Misandry is a term used to describe the hatred of men and the word misandrists refers to people who hate men. This movie is a depiction and a celebration of this hatred found in feminism.

The movie who’s main cast is entirely feminist tells the story of a feminist separatist commune with hopes to change the world. Now, for those of you not familiar with feminist separatist communes, these are places that feminists have been creating around the world since the early 1970s, where men are not allowed and where women are indoctrinated in lesbianism and feminism. One example of such communes is the Susan B. Anthony Women’s Land Trust (About SuBAMUH (https://subamuh.wordpress.com/exploring-subamuh/)) found in the US. Another example is SuperShe, a feminist separatist island found in the Baltic Sea (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/13/finl...allow-men.html).

Another example of these separatist, male-free, feminist utopias is the Jinwar. This is a women-only village created, by western feminist NGOs in collaboration with armed Kurdish communist groups responsible for many atrocities, in war torn Syria. Welcome to Jinwar, a women-only village in Syria that wants to smash the patriarchy (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...m_source=quora).

So, these separatist communes are very real. They are not isolated to the west, but are found across the globe. Feminists have been writing about them for decades, in hundreds of books describing their ideal world, a world ruled by women, free of men. The Herland Trilogy, The Female Man, Woman on the Edge of Time, The Power, The Kanshou and The Magister (thank you David May (https://www.quora.com/profile/David-May-106)) are just but a few examples of these books.

In the Misandrists the separatist commune is run by a woman named Big Mother (a feminist term pervasive throughout feminist literature used to describe women of authority, feminist Goddesses and sometimes the Earth). Big Mother, played by German feminist actress Susanne Sachße, wants to impose a feminist matriarchy on the world through separatism.

**What is separatism?**

Briefly, feminism preaches the idea that we live in a world run by a system it calls *The Patriarchy*, a system created by men to objectify and enslave women for the benefit of men. Feminist doctrine claims that one way in which *The Patriarchy* objectifies women is through heterosexuality, which it claims is not a natural practice but a social construct imposed on women by men. Men, according to feminist doctrine, use heterosexual relationships as a means of power and control over women by means of romance and intercourse. Prominent feminists have likened romance to rape. Take Andrea Dworkin, this woman described by feminists as an icon, an inspiration and a legend (INSPIRE: Andrea Dworkin – Behind The Myth - The Heroine Collective (http://www.theheroinecollective.com/...hind-the-myth/)), as an example:

“Romance (Andrea claimed) is rape embellished with meaningful looks.” in a speech given by herself in a “Take Back the Night” feminist rally in 1980.

In the 1970s icon of feminism Jill Johnston, in a book she titled Lesbian Nation, The Feminist Solution (a term she borrowed from the Nazi ideology for its solution to the problem of the Jews), she offered a solution to problems claimed by feminists of *The Patriarchy. *She called this solution separatism i.e. the complete separation of women from men in society on all levels through the pursuit of lesbianism.

*“All women are lesbians, except those who don’t know it naturally. They are but don’t know it yet. I am a woman and, therefore, a lesbian. I am a woman who is a lesbian because I am a woman, and a woman who loves herself naturally who, with other women, is a lesbian. A woman who loves women, loves herself. Naturally, this is the case. A woman is herself is all woman, is a natural-born lesbian, so we don’t mind using the name. Like any name it is quite meaningless. It means naturely [Sic]. I am a woman and whatever I am, we are. We affirm being what we are, the way, of course, all men are homosexuals. Being, having a more sense of their homo: their homo-ness, their ecce homo-ness. Their ecce prince and more than master-ness … to be equal we have to become who we really are. As women we will never be equal women until we love one another. Especially from the White House. The President of the United States last night announced the appointment of a lesbian to his cabinet. We’re getting to the bottom of women’s lib. We’re going down on women’s lib… the new thing that’s happening is the withdrawal of women to give to each other their own sense of self. Until women see in each other the possibility of a primal commitment, which includes sexual love, they will be denying themselves the love and value they readily accord to men. Thus affirming their second-class status. Until all women are lesbians there will be no true political revolution…”* Wrote Ms Johnston in *Lesbian Nation: The Feminist Solution*.
These ideas became an integral part of feminism.

*“Our rejection of heterosexual sex challenges male domination in its most individual and common form. We offer all women something better than submission to personal oppression. We offer the beginning of the end of collective and individual male supremacy… Lesbianism is the key to liberation and only women who cut their ties to male privilege can be trusted to remain serious in the struggle against male dominance.” *Wrote feminist Dee Graham in *Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men’s Violence, and Women’s Lives*, in 1994.

Women within the feminist movement who publicly apposed separatism became labelled *Phallic Women* by feminists, women who serve male interests. Many such women became the victims of violence, censorship and ostracisation. Separatism through this violence, ostracisation and censorship typical of proponents of the feminist movement became greatly empowered. It went on to greatly influence feminism in its entirety:

*“It is my belief that without us, feminism would never have been more than a caucus of the broad Left. Separatism was right there in the middle, influencing all women… What we separatists did was to reduce the very complex set of circumstances which combine to oppress women, to a single uncluttered issue. That is the stark injustice of the total humiliation of women on all levels by men.”* Wrote feminist journalist Angela Neustatter of feminist separatism, in *Hyenas in Petticoats*, in 1998.

Now, in this movie Big Mother seeks to impose a Matriarchy on the world by promoting feminist separatism and lesbianism through the spread of lesbian pornography and by, of course, murdering men whenever and wherever possible.

This following passage demonstrates an example of the repugnancy found throughout this movie. It involves a heated discussion between two feminists belonging to the commune:

Feminist 1: *Don’t you like living in a separatist stronghold?*

Feminist 2: *Of course I do! Men are despicable and abominable. They are the pigs of the world!!!*

Feminist 1: *Now, lets leave pigs out of this.*

Feminist 2: *Not that kind of pigs. I mean, they are the cops of the world. They should all be dragged out into the streets and ritually sodomised…Facist’s!!!*

Feminist 1: *Calm down.*

Feminist 2: *I am getting so tired of waiting!!! waiting, waiting, waiting… Women have been waiting for an eternity. When are we going to posit ourselves authentically as Subjects?!! *(Subjects is a communist term referring to people who rule the world by means of objectifying other classes).

Feminist 1: *You have to be patient. Big Mother knows what she is doing.*

This following passage taken from another part of the movie involves a discussion between Big Mother and a male feminist begging for his life by trying to convince feminists of the commune that he is supportive of their cause:
Big Mother: *Let me womansplain something to you… You should know that our struggle is not for parity in a corrupt system, but against men in general.*
Feminists of the commune: *Blessed be the Goddess of all worlds that has not made me a man!*

This is shortly followed by Big Mother stripping this male feminist naked with the help of feminists within the commune before castrating him alive and tearing him apart with a surgical knife. The movie shows the castration in all its detail.

The feminists go on to start an armed struggle where they impose their ways on the world and everyone lives happily ever after.

One review written by a feminist about this feminist movie describes it as being anti-feminist! Why? Well, not because it is sexist against men but because this feminist reviewer took great offence from feminists within the movie for not castrating and murdering the man earlier on in the movie than they did. She called this feminist movie anti-feminist because the feminists in the movie didn’t kill the man sooner than they did in the film…:
9 Reasons Why Antifeminist Propaganda 'The Misandrists' Will Make You Want to Bleach Your Eyes - AfterEllen (https://www.afterellen.com/entertain...each-your-eyes)

Now, having read all of this, do you think feminism is in any position to criticise incels or MGTOW or any other type of separatist group? yeah...no.
Feminism /= men-hating. There is an (unpopular) strand of feminism that is men-hating but to equate that with all of feminism is like saying Islam is all about terrorism.

And until feminists mass-murder people they aren't as bad as incels.
0
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 month ago
#32
(Original post by Johnny Tightlips)
Feminism /= men-hating. There is an (unpopular) strand of feminism that is men-hating but to equate that with all of feminism is like saying Islam is all about terrorism.

And until feminists mass-murder people they aren't as bad as incels.
I am Jewish and not a Muslim. Any injustice affecting any people affects me. I could care less about people's colour, gender etc. If you are being victimised I will stick up for you, if you are white, man, women, child, black anything and everything...and I will do this even if it means standing up and shouting in a world where most people are against me.

Islam, in general, does not have within its doctrine any core principle that justifies terrorism. I cannot therefore claim that islam supports terrorism because such notion would be an unfair generalisation that applies only to rare interpretations of this religion.

I can however state that feminism is = man hatred. Why so? because feminism in its entirety accepts the idea of the patriarchy as its most fundamental principle. What is the patriarchy? It is the idea that we live in a world run by a system created by men to exploit women for the benefit of men. Its a fundamental core that encourages followers of this ideology to view men, not by anything but their gender, as enemies. This is why man hatred is rife within feminism.

Feminists are taught, by feminism, that men are the cause of their problems and all world problems.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 1 month ago
0
reply
adam271
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 month ago
#33
It was obvious that when females and gay people started getting special treatment that males were going to jump on the (im a victim bandwagon).

It's the infantilization of the poplus. "If she gets special treatment I want it as well!"
Men want a share in victim hood.

Male right groups are stupid but not unexpected.
0
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 month ago
#34
(Original post by adam271)
Male right groups are stupid but not unexpected.
Tell that to the tens of millions of homeless, street children around the world over 80% of whom are male.

Last edited by Pinkisk; 1 month ago
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 month ago
#35
(Original post by Johnny Tightlips)
Feminism /= men-hating. There is an (unpopular) strand of feminism that is men-hating but to equate that with all of feminism is like saying Islam is all about terrorism.

And until feminists mass-murder people they aren't as bad as incels.
This guy is one of those Red Pill dorks. Don't enter his world, just leave him to it.
0
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 month ago
#36
Incels are scary said feminism...an ideology whose books are full of the most disgusting things you can possibly imagine.

Anyone interested in feminist books promoting animal rape written by some of the top minds in feminism? or how about a small archive of private diaries by iconic feminists on their sexual experiences with animals? Nope..I am not even making this up.

This is where we are heading with feminism and people are whining about insignificant groups that lack power and authority like incels.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 1 month ago
0
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 month ago
#37
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
This guy is one of those Red Pill dorks. Don't enter his world, just leave him to it.
How about acting on your own advice? Try the block function. I am going to give it a go right now.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 1 month ago
0
reply
Joe312
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 month ago
#38
(Original post by Pinkisk)
lol...They don't normally respond to these kind of posts. Its impossible. They can't refute them.
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
Your examples actually amount to one death not thousands...
(Original post by Pinkisk)
Don't bother replying. I do not care to read more of your hapless attempts at trivialisation, justification nonsense. You are evidence that feminism is dangerous.

Oh yeah and feminists liked this woman who then ended up killing people in myanmarr!! checkmate feminists!!!
I mean, this is quite amusing.
Last edited by Joe312; 1 month ago
3
reply
Pinkisk
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 month ago
#39
(Original post by Joe312)
(Original post by Pinkisk)
Don't bother replying. I do not care to read more of your hapless attempts at trivialisation, justification nonsense. You are evidence that feminism is dangerous.

Oh yeah and feminists liked this woman who then ended up killing people in myanmarr!! checkmate feminists!!![/thread]

I mean, this is quite amusing.
Ya. They justify and trivialise her every crime in the same way that they justify and trivialise the hate and violence prevalent within their movement....and if you think this example is bad...how about this one:

The White Feather campaign. In the first (and second) world war the suffragettes gave up their campaign for the vote to start a campaign to pressure men into war. They walked around the streets of the UK hanging white feathers on men and boys to shame them to enlist and fight in the wars. Hundreds of thousands of men and boys were were shamed into war death and destruction at the hands of these icons of feminism.

In so far as murder and violence, incels are amateurs compared to feminists.
Last edited by Pinkisk; 1 month ago
0
reply
Joe312
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 month ago
#40
(Original post by Pinkisk)
Ya. They justify and trivialise her every crime in the same way that they justify and trivialise the hate and violence prevalent within their movement....and if you think this example is bad...how about this one:

The White Feather campaign. In the first (and second) world war the suffragettes gave up their campaign for the vote to start a campaign to pressure men into war. They walked around the streets of the UK hanging white feathers on men and boys to shame them to enlist and fight in the wars. Hundreds of thousands of men and boys were killed in this way.

In so far as murder and violence, incels are amateurs compared to feminists.
What have either of those things got to do with feminism? You think that because something bad was done by a woman that it necessarily reflects on feminism? Cause if so I've got bad news for mens rights if we apply that logic to claim that all of men's evil actions reflect on mens rights...

Did you actually give me rep, thinking I was agreeing with you when I was clearly ridiculing you with those quotes?
2
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

With HE fairs postponed, would a virtual HE fair be useful?

Yes (45)
60%
No (30)
40%

Watched Threads

View All