I was interested and somewhat surprised to note a degree of outrage regarding the first article on Toxic Women. Although the various comments about it have been made elsewhere on the web rather than directly on this site (even though I am perfectly happy to post criticism here along with any praise) I thought it would be worthwhile to respond to some of them here.
It’s worthwhile because in writing the Toxic Women article, as opposed to just referring people to the comprehensive video documentary, there was insufficient scope to fully detail and support some of the assertions that are made. The difficulty here is that Toxic Women was written quite quickly and assembling the short clips from the documentary films was also quite quickly done. Taking clips from a larger work is always a compromise because some context is lost and the overall argument cannot be made as it wouldpo be in the complete film.
So, for example my comments on paternity testing were not supported in the article but I have completed a 20 minute film solely on this subject (not yet available for non-registered users but there is a short clip below); and my comments on employment of Feminist women by small businesses were necessarily brief in the article but are fully covered in the Equal Opportunities and Pay Gap films.
Paternity Fraud is an evil and ongoing crime against men
03m 35s
So, there is something of an unfortunate situation where the full documentary film is not yet available to more fully support some of the arguments made in posts, but c’est la vie and this should be resolved in time.
So what’s out there?
The comments I have encountered fall into a few broad categories and each will now be addressed.
“The author must be bitter from being hurt by a woman in the past”
This is a curious claim I have seen made on numerous occasions in relation to the Toxic Women article from both men’s and women’s sites. It is surprising and somewhat disheartening that men don’t appreciate the fragile position that they occupy in Feminist societies and think that is some distant problem that does not really affect them. It is even more surprising and heavily ironic coming from Feminist women who have produced an entire misguided movement out of “making the personal political”.
Erin Pizzey on Feminist illogic and Marxism
01m 40s
As I have specified in the About page, I simply haven’t experienced any heinous crimes against me by toxic women or even the Feminised state. There is simply a lack of direct harsh experience of these sorts of things in my life and I put this down to luck (and good looks!). The relations I have had with women have, until marriage, been mostly short term, and I have had many years of clubbing and very short liaisons (aka one-night-stands) which were easy to come by and which have all been good. The women I have met have been mainly fine and mainly non-toxic – I have not been burned.
However, I have met a great many men who have not been so lucky in their experiences with women and have encountered more in the way of toxic women. Some of these are friends and acquaintances, some I have come into contact with in producing the documentary.
This whole idea that my stance on Feminism must be based on personal damage at some point in the past, reminds me of a meeting I attended in London in 2004, hosted by the Mankind Initiative and Erin Pizzey, who is a patron of this men’s charity. During the meeting, we were asked to raise our hands to say why we were there; what had prompted us to attend?
Out of about 30 men present, I found that I was the only one, literally the only one, who had not been subject to quite frankly horrific treatment at the hands of toxic women:
- There were several victims of female domestic violence, one of whom had received no support from the police or any charities during his abuse despite having actually been mutilated
- There were men who had not been able to see their children for months or years because of their ex-wives or partners refusal to allow contact
One man mentioned that it had been 3 years since he had seen his daughter, because his ex-wife had levelled false claims of domestic violence against him. When these were shown to be unfounded after about a year of investigation where he was banned from the family home (his home, that he was still paying the mortgage on), she then calmly claimed sexual abuse as her next card, leading to the then current 3 year separation from his child during yet more needless investigation. No charges were brought on her for perjury, not even a warning for making a false police statement, because that apparently would not be in “the best interests of the child”. However, being a toxic mother is apparently fine.
The question that has to be asked, but that is never asked where women deny contact to fathers, is if the man is such an unsuitable man to be a father, why did she have his children?
Women have 100% control of their fertility and therefore have 100% control of the responsibility for having children. As the maxim goes, with complete control comes complete responsibility. If the men they have children with are unsuitable fathers than it follows that the women themselves are even more unsuitable mothers.
On Reproductive Rights (and lack thereof for men)
05m 46s
- There was more than one victim of our divorce laws, which would be better termed asset-stripping laws
- There was a man who had been through the hell of a false accusation of rape and a teacher who had lost his job due to the false allegation of sexual assault from a female pupil (toxicity in females starts young in our Feminised schools)
The list of woes went on until it came to me. As it turned out, we ran out of time and so I didn’t get to speak, but I would have said then what I say now: I am here and doing this because I can quite clearly see the unjust position that men hold in society due the effects of Feminism at state level and also due to toxic Feminist women.
Why is it so hard to imagine that a man would want to mount a pro-active defence against Feminism? Why must I have been savagely hurt by some variant of toxic female in order to see how easily men can be hurt by them?
I walk around with my eyes open. If i see a minefield ahead of me, I don’t need to actually step on a mine to know what the effects will be. I will not walk on and pretend it’s not there (that would be foolish) and neither will I safely dodge the mines myself and not point them out to others who may be at risk (that would be selfish). I would plant a sign before it saying “Danger: Minefield” to warn others just as I have done with warnings of toxic women.
This assumption, that I must be embittered is a very interesting aspect of the negative comments regarding the article from both women and some men. Whilst this is typical of Feminist women, it is also a part of an insight into male psychology that I will be covering soon in a new article: “Every man is an island”. Men do not seem to understand (or perhaps, do not want to admit even to themselves) just how thoroughly hated they are in Western societies due to the poisonous ideology of Feminism and nor do many men see the numerous ways in which this hatred manifests itself.
It is bigger than British Airways telling men (and being allowed to tell men) that they are not permitted to sit next to children because men are regarded as a danger to them, and it’s bigger than asset stripping on divorce, or even the common practice of denying children their fathers. It is a colossal institutional hatred that affects every aspect of men’s lives from birth to untimely death.
Erin Pizzey and Angry Harry on male psychology
10m 19s
The really interesting thing about all of this is that the same does not hold true for Feminist women. If women complain about any aspect of their treatment in society, there is no automatic assumption that she must have had some personal hurt in her life for her to be standing up for the rights of women. No, we just tend to see her as a spokeswoman for the other women who may or may not have experienced the thing they complain about.
But when I make a number of comments about the dangers of Feminist women – toxic women – they cannot be observations I have made following many years of investigation into Feminism and its effects; no, it must be that a woman hurt my feelings; or wouldn’t go out with me; or took my money; or made me homeless: or denies me contact with my children; or [insert terrible experience here].
Well, at the risk of causing some disappointment, that’s simply not the way it is.
However, there is now one way in which I am affected personally, and that’s to do with my young son. I am extremely concerned about my boy growing up in this diseased culture that is primed and ready to do it’s best to force him out of the education system, criminalise him and treat him as a second class citizen based solely upon his sex.
I am happy that my eyes are open to the toxicity of Feminism and the majority of women in the UK who have adopted Feminism (in various shades, flavours and intensities) and have therefore, made themselves toxic. I hope will be able to successfully guide my son through a society increasingly geared to hate him and give him the tools to steer himself away from toxic women so that he might enjoy his life as much as possible.
“The author must be a misogynist”
That old chestnut.
To be clear, my issue is with Feminism as an ideology and those specific women who have made themselves toxic by embracing Feminism.
Women, in the main, have as many flaws as men and possibly as many virtues. Women are the complimentary sex to men, not the opposite sex, and this world works best when men and women live together in harmony. There is no room in this world or on this site for misogyny or misandry – they are both entirely self-defeating. However, I have no compunction whatsoever in laying into toxic women and describing the societal damage that they cause.
As for why the charge of misogyny may have been levelled at me, I can only speculate, but of course, Feminists do not like to be criticised in any way, shape or form even while they feel free to viciously criticise men.
Men are responsible for all evil, right? (feat Michelle Elliott)
03m 04s
There’s not much more that needs to be said about this that is not better said by Angry Harry and Erin Pizzey (reposted clip from the original article):
Men must not speak of their oppression
04m 26s
“False claims of sexual harassment don’t happen that much”
This same argument is made about rape. Basically the line is that a woman would never lie about rape. It is too serious a lie for any woman to lie about rape. But, unfortunately, as everybody should know, this is not the case. Toxic women will lie about rape at the drop of a hat.
Cuddle her in the morning or you become a rapist (feat Angry Harry)
05m 41s
The issue here is not about genuine rape when this occurs, it is about the criminal phenomenon of false rape claims. The fact is that it is too easy for men to be portrayed as rapists and for their lives to be destroyed at the whim of a woman. And contrary to Feminist mis-information on this subject, the police and the state as a whole, is primed and ready to support women in the pursuit of meritless rape claims even when they must know that no rape has occurred.
As for false claims of sexual harassment specifically, men need to wake up. As was shown in one of the video clips from Toxic Women, the only difference between a good, well-respected man and a pervert, a rapist, a harasser or an abuser, is the lack of an accusation from a female.
Our society has empowered women to such a degree that a toxic woman merely opening her mouth to make a claim, with no evidence whatsoever, no witness and no previous bad behaviour from a man, can send him home on paid leave from work while he is investigated, or in worse cases, send him to the police station to make a statement. In our supposedly male-dominated society, there is no equivalent claim that a man could make that would entail anything like the same response. It is self-evident that power like that in the hands of toxic women is based on misandry and is plainly wrong in a fair society.
You are a sexual harasser if a woman feels like you are a sexual harasser. There is no concrete definition in the law as to what actually constitutes sexual harassment. It could be anything she wants it to be. This gives women the arbitrary option of whether to feel harassed and complain or else be flattered by a man’s attention.
It could be “the way you look at her”, it could be comments you make or the websites you look at while at work. It could be an accusation of groping or an email to which she took offence.
For example, a man and woman are attracted to each other in the workplace. Emails sent to her before a relationship are cute and erotic. She likes them and she likes him. After a brief relationship that doesn’t end to her liking, she reinterprets, and these same emails suddenly become evidence of harassment and the man and the company will be made to pay.
Where sexual harassment is concerned, a toxic woman can and does have-her-cake-and-eat-it. However, women’s sexual harassment against men receives no coverage or attention whatsoever.
On sexual harassment of men by women
03m 41s
“It is because of articles like this that I’m glad Feminism exists”
Toxic women don’t come much stupider than this.
Which came first: hatred of men embodied in Feminism or the Toxic Women article? It’s hardly rocket science.
I would dearly love to be spending my time on other projects in life, but Feminism and it’s consequences for me and mine – both actual and potential – don’t allow me that luxury.
The Toxic Women article exists because of the destructive nature of Feminism and it’s corrupting influence on women that choose to follow its tenets. This woman saying that she is glad for Feminism as some sort of “defence” to the arguments made in the article is like a woman repeatedly beating a man with a stick and then, when he finally complains about it, thanking her lucky stars that she has a stick to keep her safe from his inexplicable aggression.
“Maybe if we had genuine equal opportunities at work, women wouldn’t be forced to sue their employers”
I intend to cover issues of equal opportunities in another article, particularly equality of opportunity versus equality of outcome.
As regards the Toxic Women article, I will concede that commenting on the employability of women by small business should have been supported with more material. Without the relevant documentary films to back this up, I can see that it might seem somewhat hollow. All I can do is apologise for not having the whole of the material ready for the web (but I am working on it).
As a small supporting play, it is obvious that the risks to the small business employer of hiring a woman are simply not the same as those for hiring a man. These additional risks that come from hiring women i.e. the risk that she may be toxic, are not politically-correct to point out, but I will point them out because I’m not politically-correct.
When a employee is hired there are the general risks:
- Will they be any good in the job?
- Will they steal goods or trade secrets?
- Is their CV genuine or a work of fiction?
- Will they fit in to the company ethos?
- etc, etc
And then there are the toxic-women-only risks:
- Will he leave after a year of training to have children? No he won’t. Will she? Quite possibly.
- Will he sue the employer because he is being paid less than a colleague? Highly unlikely. Will she? Much more likely.
- Will he sue his employer because a female colleague has a naked man as her computer desktop background? No, he won’t. Will she sue over a naked woman on his computer (or even a skimpily dressed woman)? Probably.
I was in a job where another guy I started with was being paid more than me for the same role. The reason he got more was because he did a better job of negotiating his salary at interview. I did not look elsewhere for reasons why I received less because I knew that the fault lay with me.
Women don’t seem to understand this basic rule of employment – you’ll be paid the least amount that you’ll accept.
The truth is that women are paid less money then men for doing different work. Where women genuinely do the same work, they are paid the same. In a market economy such as ours, if women could truly be paid less for doing the same work, companies would hire only women.
Big businesses have no fear of the complaints and litigation from toxic women, they set aside the necessary funds to pay the “damages” for a “hostile work environment” and fund sexual harassment awareness training (that strangely ignores women as perpetrators). But the net benefits of “PutWomenToWorkism” (a better name for the original form and purpose of Feminism) are very good for large businesses.
To a small business however, into which a man may have sunk all of his money, his house and his dreams, toxic women are not a good risk.
In conclusion
I would think that this has addressed much of the comment I have come across, but there may yet be a “Toxic Women 3: The Revenge” coming to your screens sometime soon.
I don’t think all women are toxic. I’m gay and used to work in a largely female discipline (psychology) so most of my friends were women.
But the problem is that when women are toxic, men have no defence.
Eg. as in my case.
http://www.indymedia.org/en/2009/01/919390.shtml
Unfortunately toxic women seem to be keenly aware of this and how to abuse laws to do the very thing they’re intended to protect against.
And what the misandrysts masquerading as feminists completely fail to acknowledge is the damage that these toxic women do to other women who are a part of these mens’ lives.
In one way, you’ve hit-the-nail-on-the-head when you say: “But the problem is that when women are toxic, men have no defence.”
However, the main point, is why is it that men have no defence?
Rather than toxic women abusing the system it’s about toxic women simply using it. In other words, the system itself is corrupt and any woman can make use of it against any man.
I don’t like the idea that the preponderance of anti-male bias in the law is there for a good purpose but a few bad apples ruin it and abuse it.
Like the “yellow-card” domestic violence law in the UK and the latest one, “go-orders” where men can be evicted from their homes essentially on a woman’s say so, under the pretence that it’s to protect vulnerable women. No. These misandric laws are not abused by toxic women, they embody abuse in themselves.
Saying that they are abused or misused is like saying that thumbscrews were invented for a positive reason and it’s just a few baddies that misuse them to torture men.