Welcome to a round-up of new laws and initiatives coming to a legislature near you, very soon…
- The Presumption of Future Divorce Act
- The DNA Contributors Act
- The Legal Human Castration Act
- The All Female University Act
- The Women’s Prison Closure Act
- The Presumption of Abuse Act
- The Extended Abortion Act
- The Rape Allegation Act
- The Sexual Harassment Protection Act
- The Women’s Health Act
- The Pension Reform Act
- Comments (43)
The Presumption of Future Divorce Act
Marriage law is now changed such that signing the marriage certificate brings forward the wholesale transfer of assets from husband to wife that more usually takes place upon the future divorce.
The new Presumption of Future Divorce Act states that in order to make any future divorce more efficient, men must transfer all bank accounts, businesses and property into the wife’s name on signing of the marriage certificate. It is hoped that this new legislation will bring down the cost and stress of divorce and allow women full control of their husband’s assets immediately, without the extended delays common with the divorce process.
Businesses celebrated the new law by offering all newly-wed women a special pampering weekend for only $4999 (specially reduced from $5000) and an unlimited line of credit at fashion stores. They said the take up of the offers has been phenomenal. One newly married woman exclaimed: ”I could never have afforded this without this great change in the law. My husband would never spend like this and the financial freedom I now enjoy can only strengthen our marriage.”
When asked, husbands-to-be shrugged and cited that it was not something that bothered them because: “divorce is something that happens to other people, and in any event, my future wife is not like that.”
The DNA Contributors Act
Government today formalised what has always been unofficially practiced and enforced by the family court and stripped all fathers of legally presumed parental rights.
The new law means that all fathers are now officially renamed DNA Contributors and their sole legal right is the responsibility to pay for their child’s upbringing. Women’s groups said that this was a perfectly fair arrangement as “no mother would deny a man access to his child if he was a decent DNA Contributor”, and it would greatly simplify custody hearings because such hearings would simply no longer be necessary.
“Formalising the arrangement between mothers and sperm donor in this way, makes it much easier for mothers to deal with DNA Contributors who are not behaving as she would like”, said Charlotte Harpy of the campaign group ‘Mother Knows Best’. “And it also makes it easier for the DNA Contributors, because they now know ahead of time that they will fail to see their children if they go to court, rather than kidding themselves over years and years of court appearances, that there might be a chance. Everybody wins.”
DNA Contributor groups did not offer a comment as they were too busy designing a logo for their new name: ‘DNA Contributors 4 Justice’.
The Legal Human Castration Act
Hilarious Katherine cuts for pleasure.
From today, it is legally permissible for a wife to castrate her husband or boyfriend if she has suffered abuse from him in the past. The evidence required to prove that she received abusive treatment from the castrated spouse, is a sworn statement from the woman that he was indeed abusive and/or made her cry.
The minimum required level of abuse for her to be acquitted, is set at shouting and/or door-slamming. Dame Brenda Hale was also said to offer that: “periods of ignoring her for longer than 60 minutes and the purchase of one or more unwanted gifts for the woman would also count as abuse severe enough to justify castration.”
Further, the man would not be permitted to ask that she actually prove that he was abusive, because the Legal Human Castration Act presumes that in enduring the unpleasant task of severing his testicles, she has suffered enough.
The All Female University Act
All-female universities are to open now that so few men are doing well enough to attend university.
It is thought that bringing proper focus to women – who now make up the vast majority of students – would help bring equality to education by delivering more appropriate tuition to women, who are continually denied this when men occupy the same campus.
University doors and entryways can now officially be painted pink, rather than just metaphorically and university staff have come out fully in favour of the new measures. As Samantha Smeghead, professor of Gender Studies remarked: “Women will finally be able to express themselves more freely with the patriarchal agents removed from the classroom and, anyway, men tend to make the campus look scruffy.”
It is also thought that incidences of campus sexual assault and rape should be much reduced, seeing as the only men on campus will be janitors and gardeners. All such staff will be required to work in pairs and made to wear police monitored electronic tags. Additionally, an armed female supervisor will be close by, ready to respond in case of any attempts of sexual harassment by the men, or even worse, any attempt to enrol.
Women’s groups lauded the proposals and it is expected to pass into law without opposition. Men’s groups could not be reached for comment, as it was Superbowl weekend.
The Women’s Prison Closure Act
Women’s prisons are to formally close their doors to women with immediate effect. Existing female prisons will be converted to men’s prisons after being renovated to make them less comfortable.
The government has fully adopted the proposals put forward by the Women’s Justice Taskforce in 2011 and has decided that prison is not the right punishment for female criminals. Women will now not face the arduousness of trials for their crimes and will instead face a three-woman panel to decide what level of community service she will need to serve, dependent on the severity her crime.
Murder will carry a maximum sentence of 3 years service, which might consist of working most weekends at shelters for battered women or similar severe punishment. She will also be required to write an essay, explaining why what she did was wrong.
The Presumption of Abuse Act
Murder of a husband or boyfriend will carry much less severe sentences than other murders under the new Presumption of Abuse Act, which affords women the legal presumption of acting in self-defence whenever she kills an intimate male partner. This will save the court’s time and tax payer’s money, by fast-tracking women who kill their male partners and sparing them the trauma of a long investigation or trial, or having to demonstrate a syndrome.
Men’s groups sent several emails in protest, saying that this made them “second-class citizens”. The Prime Minister responded in parliament that men needed to: “stop whining and man-up! Women would not go back in the box and if you are unlucky enough to be killed or castrated by your spouse, then you undoubtedly deserved it.”
The Extended Abortion Act
Women can now no longer be prosecuted for killing their children, provided that the child is younger then 3 years old.
The new Late Abortion Act allows women to extend her existing licence to kill a child, from the current maximum 24 weeks after conception, to the new maximum of 3 years after birth, providing she can find a women’s advocate to testify that she is afflicted by one of the 216 distinct syndromes that are claimed to only affect women.
It is expected that most women will still use the favourite Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy when they murder their babies. However, others are expected to try out the newer Abdication of Responsibility Syndrome and Temporary Loss of Adulthood Syndrome. Still others, might go for the brand new Comprehensive Female Multi-Spectrum Generic Temporary Loss of Any and All Responsibility Disorder Syndrome (by Proxy), which is a cutting-edge catch-all syndrome, to help women who cannot be adequately protected from punishment by using one of the other 215 syndromes.
“With this newly invented safety syndrome”, says its inventor Beverley Simpleton (known in academia affectionately, as BS), “It is hoped that no woman who is unfortunate enough to have killed her children, might suffer the indignity of being punished for it.”
The House of Commons erupted into laughter at the idea that men’s psychology should be investigated to find out if men might have equivalent syndromes to explain their murders of children or spouses, saying that it was: “a sickening attempt to subvert justice by hiding behind faux psychology.”
“It is misogynistic attitudes like that”, added one MP, “that are holding women back and preventing real equality.”
The Rape Allegation Act
The burden of proof in rape cases has been officially moved onto the accused man in rape cases and now, any women who claims to have suffered rape, has only to identify the rapist to secure prosecution.
Investigations to establish prima facie guilt are no longer required and nor is any forensic evidence. On being charged with rape, it is now wholly up to the man to prove he did not commit the crime.
Women’s groups heralded this decision as a victory for common sense, citing the well established fact that a woman “would never lie about rape” and that this saved the tax payer money at a time when we can ill afford to spend it “defending men from crimes they undoubtedly must have committed”.
Men who find themselves unable to prove that a rape did not occur, will now receive a mandatory 20 year prison term without need for an expensive trial. A win-win for the British economy and women’s rights.
When asked, men said that this “didn’t seem right, somehow”, but then again, “it wouldn’t happen” to them and there were more important things in life, such as “the NBA Finals and breasts.”
The Sexual Harassment Protection Act
Sexual harassment law received a boost today when a tribunal ruled that a woman could be sexually harassed by an unborn baby boy.
The woman, who remains nameless for legal reasons, claimed that she felt and somehow just knew that the unborn baby boy, in only his second trimester, was: “looking at me through his mothers belly and seemed to be undressing me with his eyes”. The distraught complainant has received undisclosed damages, and the unborn boy has been pre-expelled from school and placed on the sex offenders registry.
In another case, a woman has won 5 million dollars from McCrapalds restaurants by claiming that she was sexually harassed by a customer more than six years ago, when he ordered a burger and said: “Hey, you have really nice eyes”. The unnamed victim has been under medical supervision ever since the traumatic incident and cannot sleep due to the recurrent nightmares.
McCrapalds has stated that they would be taking all necessary steps to save women from compliments and all unwanted attention from men by building special screens in all restaurants, so that no one could see anyone else and also installing audio equipment that would automatically screen out all words that did not involve ordering burgers, nuggets or fries.
Male customers will have to email their orders from the front of the store and robot arms will hand the food to them through hatches to avoid any possibility of female workers experiencing unwanted physical contact with male customers. Female customers, however, would enter through a different restaurant entrance and order direct with staff as usual.
Women’s groups claimed that this was an important victory for the rights of women in the workplace, who should be able to work “without fear of being spoken to or looked at by men in any way at all.”
Men’s groups, headed by contributors at ‘Reddit – should men have rights?’ (also known by the misnomer, ‘Reddit men’s rights’) agreed that the rights of women should be paramount no matter what small inconveniences befell men.
“To disagree with such an arrangement might cast the men’s movement in a bad light”, opined the folks at Reddit. “We are not here to upset women or stand in the way of women’s rights no matter what they demand. We stand in support of men’s rights as long as they come behind women’s, children’s, animals and plants rights. We know our place.”
Women’s groups seemed quite surprised at this and only added: “They took the words right out of our mouths.”
The Women’s Health Act
The government today agreed that health spending for women, currently eight times that of men, and up to 100 times that of men in some areas, was not sufficiently addressing the health needs of women.
The Minister for Women and Girls stated that: “it is the priority of any modern society to invest in the well-being of women. It is abominable that women are not receiving adequate funding towards this aim, while men continue to receive funds that could be better spent on women.” To this end, the government announced today, that all spending on male health will cease with immediate effect, with all funding re-allocated to female health.
Spending on female health would receive a further boost with the diversion of funding currently used to reduce workplace deaths, suicides and homelessness. Women’s groups celebrated this, stating that: “as women are barely affected by these other issues, it is only right that the money should instead go into female health where it would save women’s lives.”
The Pension Reform Act
Women sure have it rough.
Women’ groups were delighted today as the government reversed their decision to bring women’s retirement age into line with the age for men: “This shows that government is finally listening to the needs of women who suffer discrimination at every turn.”
Instead of equalizing the retirement age at 67 for both sexes, men, who have worked until 65 years of age since 1950 in England, will now be required to work until age 75 to make up the shortfall in taxation, whilst women stay at their current retirement age of 60. With men’s life expectancy in England currently being 76 years, women’s groups were quick to point out that men retiring at age 75 still afforded the average man “the luxury of a full year of retirement to enjoy with their families. What more could a man want?”
A spokeswoman for women’s advocate group ‘Women have it Rough: Always Have and Always Will’ said: “Whilst it’s true that men have for the last 70 years, worked until age 65 whilst women have retired at age 60; and whilst it’s true that disproportionate spending on women’s health means that women live longer and therefore have a long retirement, whereas men die soon after retirement; and whilst it’s also true that it is mainly men who contribute the bulk of money to pay for retirement benefits that only women live to enjoy, the fact remains that women should be getting a better deal.”
The women’s group ‘Women, Women and Only Women’ added:“The fact that women are female must be of overriding significance to any civilized society. Women deserve more.”
Men’s groups said that they would much prefer that men didn’t have to work right up to the average age of male death in order to fund women’s retirement. However, they accepted that it’s a man’s duty to do whatever he can for women, particularly because “women have it so bad in our society.”
In a rare show of solidarity with men, women’s groups fully agreed.
- The Presumption of Future Divorce Act
- The DNA Contributors Act
- The Legal Human Castration Act
- The All Female University Act
- The Women’s Prison Closure Act
- The Presumption of Abuse Act
- The Extended Abortion Act
- The Rape Allegation Act
- The Sexual Harassment Protection Act
- The Women’s Health Act
- The Pension Reform Act
- Comments (43)
I wanna be sick.
Wow! Now, if that doesn’t put some perspective on things I don’t know what will. I think your articles are approaching MRA critical mass, lol. The whole time I was reading, I was strangely envisioning J. D. Salinger’s, “Catcher in the Rye” protagonist Holden Caulfield narrating the story, first person. Great writing!
Cheers.
I had in mind more of a typical evening news show. Light presentation of the days legal news, same tone as reporting the weather.
Inexorable Feminist governance in action
I think I’d like to turn this one into a short film but it might be tricky to deliver.
MWM,
As usual, a great article.
Unfortunately, not so far off the mark of reality.
A good pinch of satire combined with unequivocal TRUTHS,
from the master blender MWM…
“Samantha Smeghead” Absolutely priceless!
She was going to be Samantha Acunt, but I decided to go softer.
Yes, I think you were being too diplomatic there, MWM. I like the “Acunt” surname, it’s got that gutsy, raw, realistic quality that fits rather well. lol
Something fishy going off here!
I would say that this is bull, but your videos exposing how the world really is, this is very possible.
I actually got a little sick when reading this, especially while reading the Extended Abortion act. This is outright murder. And women think men are monsters. Ha! I beg to differ. In nature, it is usually the female who kills her own offspring. I sometimes wish it wasn’t the same for humans…but this is outright abominable behaviour. Women are now the sickest beings to ever grace the planet. I am permanently disgusted.
I think someone should do a study:
Out of those crimes in which females where arrested how many were charged (compared to the same number of Men for same crime. If charged how many were found guilty compared to the same number of Men, if found guilty what was the average sentence compared to the identical crimes committed by a Man.
We all know the truth but I would like to see it in black and white then shove it up someone’s nose and say…WHY?
More lenient sentencing for women is not some hidden secret of the British judicial system, it is a mandated policy.
There is info out there regarding the precise sentencing disparities you allude to, but this is yet more collation of the same endless and obvious facts regarding equality and misandry that not too many people really care about.
A man gets 10 years and a woman gets 6 for the same crime: how valuable is that information? Considering that the government has decided to enforce discrimination as policy, what else matters?
I think the argument is won on this particular issue and now it’s not about information gathering, it’s about something different.
Now there is where real effort should be expended: on the thorny issue of what next?
Brilliant…..and scary!
That was funny, without going over the top because when I read about the “rape allegation act” it actually wasn’t far from the truth. As I research more into each satirical law, what is actually going on right now, I shudder because while it is a joke now, some may actually come to pass like the women only at university.
Men’s Health Magazine published an article i read back in 2000 about how the trend of men leaving college and women going to college would mean that by 2050 the last man will graduate from college if the trend continues. Their predictions for 2010, only ten years down the line, actually did come true and they believed that false rape allegations would continually weigh in favor of women until this cycle is complete and men are removed from college altogether. Well if you’ve been following the articles on avoiceformen.com you know then that the US department of education has been compelling colleges to change their policy concerning campus rape allegations, and of course like good little public institutions, they are falling in line. So in effect we are bearing witness to the All Female University Act come to pass.
I do follow AVfM and I’m well aware of – what is effectively – a false rape culture being encouraged at US universities. There is also no deviation from the trend discussed by Men’s Health magazine.
Amusing that there is a somewhat casual article about it in a niche magazine, like it’s not of dramatic import. A bit like an article appearing in a relatively minor geology magazine: “Britain will sink into the ocean in 50 years unless we stop building tunnels so deep underground.”
So what do we do? We commission more deep tunneling projects.
Why? Because we don’t care whether men attend university or not because we are too stupid to appreciate the consequences of having a population consisting of hundreds of thousands of Gender Studies, Sociology and Psychology graduates and a grand total of about 30 engineering and computer science graduates.
Hence all the women into science, computing and architecture initiatives. Rather than get men back into the game, we are actively and deliberately attempting to replace them.
When this policy fails, the chickens won’t so much come home to roost, as they will crush us into oblivion. And I’m only partially overstating the case.
Interesting bit about the tunnels sinking England, apparently that is how rabies finally reached the country, with rats traveling through the Eurostar tunnel. But who cares right? Society doesn’t seem to be bothered because that’s what we in America call ‘progressivism’.
If you thought that made you sick, wait until you see this; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5OdQGbVNa4
That’s quite scary considering that it is a product of feminism which is forced upon men rather than something that they inflict on themselves voluntarily. But in my opinion, the laws are scarier because this made the forcing even stronger. I’m glad that I am not in the West.
Autcel — you will be surprised my friend. Men in countries like the UK and the US are VOTING to have laws like these dumped on them. We in the MM have nicknamed these guys chivalrous white knights.
What’s at the back of their minds? It appears they picture themselves as women’s heroes. They seem to have a mother complex. They grovel to their wives, girlfriends and no doubt potential girlfriends as well.
They want to impress, so they want to “be good”.
Unfortunately, there is more of them than of us. So governments will not listen to our case.
Hence the chilling dangers that could lie ahead.
The big question facing us all right now is how do we get our message across to a wider audience? Most guys are in a state of oblivion over the possibility of horrendous acts like the aforementioned being passed. I look at the numbers of views on MWM’s YouTube vids and these are depressingly low for the length of time they have been available.
Yet I think large numbers of thinking men would be won over in an instant if they had exposure to men’s issues, especially when well-communicated. Making great videos is one thing. But getting the public to view them is another.
This has to be the next challenge.
Where to start? That’s the big question.
We don’t. Most men are, as you say, oblivious to these issues and they will remain so for all of their lives.
To my mind, this is not about the many who will never get it, it’s about the few who will.
As Churchill said: “Never in the field of human conflict, was so much, owed by so many, to so few”.
Just as an unforgivably large number of people will not know to whom Churchill was referring (nor even who ‘Churchill’ was), so future generations of men will owe a great deal to the numerous actions of a few men today, but not know anything about it. It’s the nature of the game we’ve signed up to.
So take heart: video views are neither here nor there. It’s misleading chaff. The job will still get done, it’s just going to take a little longer than we thought.
God this is scary, and it’s scary because it all seems so feasable, so in line with feminist thinking on many subjects.
We should all have a sweepstake to see how many of these predictions will actually come true.
I think the Women’s Prisons Act, the Presumption of Abuse Act, and the Rape Allegation Act are all definitely possible. The Universities may not even need an Act of Parliament to become wholly feminised the way current trends are going. And I couldn’t entirely rule anything else out either.
I read this and was both sickened and humored at the same time. It’s an odd feeling, to say the least.
And thanks for the shout-out in your subscribers video. Whenever I’m in the field (leaving comments and debating online) and need to drop a source for general MRA content, I say ‘watch manwomanmyth youtube videos.”
There is NO better or more accessible introduction to MRA information and analysis than your documentary project. Well freaking done, man.
http://www.abcdesevilla.es/20111214/espana/sevi-zapatero-denunciado-delito-lesa-201112141254.html#
The Spanish prime minister denounced by crime of genocide and lesa humanity, on having approved laws that alone chase the men, for the fact of being men. The general district attorney’s office of the Spanish condition admits to step the denunciation.
Everytime a feminist try to convince me they are for equality.
I don’t listen what they say
I don’t read what they write
I look what they do!
Sadly, this is very accurate and has to change.
http://www.gendercide.org/
A pitiful site trying to show genocide of men and women. Of course, it focuses on the near mythical “gendercide” of women and how baby girls were murdered and baby boys preferred. This is a perfect example of man-hating dogma and painting men as child-killing monsters.
I think I’ll look at this along with a section on myths of the Middle East.
I just recently stumbled across this radical feminist website, where they advocate the complete erradication of men.
“As to what that cure may be, my best bet is that what’s wrong with men is that their androgens need genetic modification. I’m serious about this. If we can do it with corn, men ought to be easy.”
The comments section is also sickening and disturbing. One reads : -
“Women need to stop raising male children. Women who raise male children are digging the graves of other females. Nobody wants to bite that bullet (except lesbian separatists) but it must be done.”
Some people think this kind of feminism died out in the 70s. It didn’t.
http://radicalhub.wordpress.com/2011/10/04/radical-feminism-in-the-21st-century/
Myths of the Middle East is a superb idea, and I eagerly anticipate your thought on that. There are far too many MRAs who happily concede the LIE that women are oppressed in the Middle East. Some just blindly accept what the media tells them, while others are primarily driven by their anti-Muslim agendas.
If you ever made a video on that subject, it would really broaden your horizons and attract even more curious visitors.
“Gendercide” would be a touchy subject but would expose the truth.
please if you or anyone have any information about the Middle East or Asian countries please post it. I see too many people say things like “feminism is needed because women are oppressed in other countries”. Even some people who don’t support feminism in the west say things like “even though feminism is about manhating here, in other countries feminism is needed” or things like “certain countries commit gendercide against women” which I have a feeling doesn’t happen that often.
the last thing we need is to spread the disaster that is feminism to other countries. I have no problem with legitimate human rights groups (I have a feeling that PEOPLE in eastern countries face hardships, not just women) but not one sided BS like feminism.
I’ve watched your youtube video’s for a while now and I recently came across your site here. I found this article and I can honestly say that I am disgusted, appalled, confused, enraged and greatly saddened by these laws.
How can anyone be in western civilization be so cruel and heartless to make such horrible laws and even easily get people who are supposed to protest these types of things to support it as well.
I can honestly say that I don’t hurt easily. But I only made it halfway through this list before breaking down into tears. I can certainly believe this, but I just don’t understand it.
Mr. Myth, I would like to thank you for all your hard work on spreading the true nature of feminists and making sure to show the heartless and selfshess of these a**holes.
You have my complete and full support in this community. God speed, my good sir.
” This paper has huge sympathy with single mothers, many of whom cope heroically with little or no support – practical, emotional or financial – from their children’s fathers.”
It is amazing isn’t it. Straight away the agenda driven press pontificate about “poor single mothers” Always the Men’s (walking wallet and sperm donor) fault, never the Tens of thousands of little tarts who have made a living out of the welfare state(knowingly assisted by Labour) by having a kid, pushing the father out of the frame and in most cases denying them their kid? I hope this country DROWNS in a Sea of semi-literate, mentally damaged, destructive youngsters. When it comes you can take a good look at feminism and Marxism and say “they must all burn”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2079611/David-Camerons-duty-protect-family.html?ITO=1490
this article shows that feminists will never change
http://whatmenthinkofwomen.blogspot.com/2012/01/tory-shepherd-punch-hypocrite-and.html
It takes faults which are typical of feminists and super imposes them on MRA’s. Do feminists suffer from projection?
Notice how the author cited Michael Flood – a notorious male feminist- as a source and even said that he is an “expert on men and gender issues” – this is pretty much equivalent to saying that a Klan member is an expert on blacks.
I like how feminists keep crying that MRAs a bunch of “whining angry white men” I’m not even white and I can still see feminists for what they truly are
I have to say. This all looks unbelievable. But experience with misandry in society is leading me to believe that this is all too true.
Feminists: without men you would not be reading this or anything else, not on a computer, not sitting on a couch or any other type of furniture, not inside a home or other structure, not enjoying plumbing, electricity, heating, cooling, satellite TV, internet access, refrigerators and the varied food contained therein, a car waiting for you to drive, talking on your cell phone, on paved roads with traffic control devices for your safety, over bridges, through tunnels, to malls, parking structures, hospitals, airports, to waiting aircraft to fly you anywhere in the world using communications/GPS systems to guide them there.
Without men you would not be capable of judging the previous paragraph as one big run on sentence, as men developed the written word and the codification of words.
Without men you women would be living in naturally formed caves and killing each other to live in them as there would not be enough to go around!
Before you reply with irrational diatribes about how there are some women that build or provide these things, as if they represent all women when men represent only their individual achievements, remember that if men didn’t exist none of what I mentioned would exist for women to learn about from a man in the first place. Women would never have developed 99.999% of everything you take for granted that only exists because of men!
This isn’t about men being superior in these areas, which they clearly are, but rather about RESPECT AND APPRECIATION !
Your life would royally SUCK without men!
No air time necessary for women’s accomplishments as society has been inundated with that crap for literally decades, enough of that propaganda from the insecure and self entitled!
It wasn’t until I saw “McCrapalds” that I even realised this was a satire. It feels so real!
This is way out of time to comment on this post, but I’d just like to point out your hypothetical “Delayed Abortion Act”. That seemed of all your suggested future laws the least likely, but I’m sure you’ve heard/read about the “ethicist” who said women should have the right to abort (kill) newborn her baby. You had it spot on there MWM, but I never would have thought it possible myself. In twenty or so years’ time a woman’s right to kill her newborn baby will likely be enshrined in law, and when that happens you will have the right to say “I told you so”…
The scary thing is that these laws do look to be coming true. Last year Ken Clarke announced Tory government plans to close all womens prisons and convert them to mens prisons. No woman should have to go to prison apparently!
Why are men so complacent? Why do men just allow this to happen. Why cant they stand up for themselves before its too late???
Mr Man,
The problem is most men don’t really KNOW what’s going on… They’ve been effectively brainwashed, where they now believe what the gynocracy has been drumming into them over the past 30 years: that men are worthless. That is an installed belief now of most of the Western world. That’s why it’s acceptable for a gaggle of misandrous whores to ghoulishly laugh on public television (viewed by many millions) about Catherine Kieu castrating her husband. Now, can you imagine the world-wide OUTRAGE if the genders were swapped in an incident like that? Where a man say, cut off his wife’s breast or super-glued her vagina or similar?
Sure there were a few angry words expressed by a few MRA’s on blogs etc about these nasty bitches, but nothing that mattered to anyone.
What’s needed is information such as the documentaries that MWM creates to be broadcast on international mainstream television (see my comment below this), however the gynocracy have such a monopoly on everything to do with supporting their misandry, that such broadcasts would be prohibited and if they ever did make it to mainstrean TV, we’d never hear the end of it.
Angry Harry discusses a classic example of how their misandry has infiltrated Western society here. Both women and men are generally quite accepting of their institutionalized hatred, but only because of the very subtle yet powerful propaganda campaign that they have been running. You should read all of Harry’s articles about this as he expalins very clearly and concisely how they have succeeded in making the human male a disposable, worthless peice of garbage.
I have been reading your pages and viewed many of your great video presentations over the past year or so, but strangely this is the first time I’ve submitted a comment.
Has any of your work ever been screened on any television channels?
I guess not – you’re not in prison…
What I’m advocating is your quality of presentation, which leaves many of the mainstream documentaries in the dust, especially your narration ability.
If they could be screened on channels like Discovery or National Geographic, our message would reach a lot of men!
This brings me to what finally prompted this first post to your blog:
Your comment at the end of The Sexual Harassment Protection Act above:
I used to be a regular reader of the Reddit sites and I even posted a couple of comments until I noticed what you’ve highlighted by way of that snide, yet totally TRUE remark.
I don’t even read them anymore, let alone post to Reddit mangina’s rights.
I regularly however, do post comments and links to articles at theantifeminist.com under the same pseudonym – Alan Vaughn.
I think you have a marvellous blog here and your work is world class. It’s such a shame that it cannot be fully exposed to the world, along with the absolute truth that it conveys!
Thanks for your comment and support.
I’ve actually had one video turned into a radio broadcast in Portsmouth, but that’s as far as it goes.
I’m doing some new stuff now which will correct many of the missteps and use more rhetorical discipline. I’d expect it to have wider appeal and we’ll see if it does. As you know, nobody in this area of work expects mainstream acceptance.
I’ve looked in on Reddit MR once a year for the last two years and – based on the evidence – I’ve have had to write the site off due to its virtual betrayal of the genuine cause of men. I will look at it again in a few months and see if there has been any change, you never know.