Tag Archives: feminist injustice

The Wrongs of the Men’s Movement

“On the one hand there are real harms against men perpetuated by feminism and on the other there are real responsibilities that men owe towards women and children. The real harm done by feminism is used as an excuse to reject the real responsibilities of men towards women. The appropriate response to feminist injustices is men asserting their rightful authority; the MRA does the exact opposite in response, he instead rejects his responsibilities (Jesse Powell).”

I am not an MRA nor could I ever be. I don’t think anybody’s going to deny that there are genuinely good men out there who have been done wrong or who have been screwed over. But the MRA response is to whine and cry and plead that he’s such a victim,that society should just have more sympathy for him and that if things were just more “fair” and “equal” that somehow it would remedy all of his problems.

The original feminist war was on women. Feminists and MRAs were on the same side until feminists started seeing all the damage the movement had caused to women and started backing out. They created policies to remedy the situation by anti-male and anti-family legislation to balance out the harm being done to women. In turn men’s groups responded with legislation to harm women to try to balance out what the feminists were doing.

When a MRA is screwed over by his wife cheating on him, leaving him, taking the kids, etc. he responds by saying that society should just be more fair to him. He employs the MRA equivalent of the feminist mutilated beggar argument. The MRA hates women and encourages other men not to marry and deny responsibility, to ‘get back’ at the woman by screwing the ‘bitch’ over and he encourages other men who follow him to do the same thing. Don’t marry men, don’t marry! Don’t be the breadwinners because she’ll just screw you in the end! Nowhere does it cross his mind to assert his authority and demand that men be the heads of their homes anymore. Nowhere does it cross his mind to accept responsibility.

We have a problem with out of wedlock births in this country and increasingly in most of the Western world. MRAs are on top of it. Deny your responsibilities men, deny your responsibilities. Deny that you got the girl pregnant, run from marriage -run real fast boys-and encourage mandatory paternity testing (at some undesignated time after the child is born, of course) because all women are just a bunch of sluts looking to commit paternity fraud to get a chunk of your paycheck for the next 18 years! Make identifying the father, instead of marrying him, mandatory for the welfare! (One would think if they wanted to get out of child support obligations they would just be screwing themselves over with this policy, but never mind that). Nowhere does it cross his mind to enforce the double standard and enforce patriarchal restraints on the women or enforce the Legitimacy Principle- that men can only be responsible for legitimate children and a wife that is faithful.

The MRA hates women. He wants to literally see them dead. The average MRA wants to see women dead on the battlefield to deal with what men have always had to suffer through and he wants an MRA version of affirmative action that would ensure women are forced into dangerous jobs and die in those jobs in equal numbers to men. Never mind that women suffer the throes of pregnancy and childbirth just to bring these pathetic excuses for men into this world and always have. Caring for a woman and being chivalrous to her never crosses his mind as the appropriate thing to do.

What could MRAs do? If their movement wasn’t just a hate movement to get out of responsibility the MRA would have several options.

First, they would enforce the double standard upon women. Women would either bear legitimate children or receive no assistance and no financial support from the father. Men would marry the mother while she was pregnant or they would receive no rights and their children would not carry their name. A man would be sure of a woman’s character and have the intention of marrying her or he would not enter into a romantic relationship with her and he would not sleep with her. If he just wanted sex he could pursue the time honored male tradition of buying a prostitute. A woman’s virtue and good name would be of utmost importance (going back to a man only getting involved with a woman of honorable status) so she would reserve her body for her future husband and would not bear children outside of that union.

“Here, from John Dollard’s Caste and Class in a Southern Town, is an example of such manipulative regulation “from the outside”– males persuading females that they are really regulating themselves:

One of the rituals of the university dances is that of a fraternity of young blades entitled the Key-Ice. During the intermission the lights are turned out and these men march in carrying flaming brands. At the end of the procession four acolytes attend a long cake of ice. Wheeled in on a cart it glimmers in the torches’ flare. Then the leader, mounted on a table in the center of the big gymnasium, lifts a glass cup of water and begins a toast that runs: “To Woman, lovely woman of the Southland, as pure and as chaste as this sparkling water, as cold as this gleaming ice, we lift this cup, and we pledge our hearts and our lives to the protection of her virtue and chastity.’

For ‘protection’ Peggy Morgan would (correctly) read enforcing [1]”

To solve the divorce problem men could demand that divorce be harder to attain and demand that there be major fault involved for a divorce to be granted. To solve the problem men wouldn’t sit there begging and playing the ‘poor me’ guilt trip trying to get all of society to feel sorry for them. They would take their responsibilities in their families and assert their rightful authority. They would financially support their wives and take care of them. If we had patriarchy their wives would not leave or go anywhere because of the authority the man asserts and the responsibility he has for them. The woman would be without her social status and without her support if she was not married to him and she would be without her children as he would have the authority over them.

‘A man and wife are one person in law; the wife loses all her rights as a single woman, and her existence is entirely absorbed in that of her husband. He is civilly responsible for her acts; she lives under his protection or cover, and her condition is called coverture.

A woman’s body belongs to her husband, she is in his custody, and he can enforce his right by a writ of habeas corpus.

The legal custody of children belongs to the father. During the life-time of a sane father, the mother has no rights over her children, except a limited power over infants, and the father may take them from her and dispose of them as he thinks fit [2].’

Real men would not whine and complain that women are not taking on an ‘equal share’ of what should rightfully be the man’s sole responsibility. But, no, MRAs cannot accept anything that would actually hold them responsible for traditional male responsibilities. They whine and they cry on and on and they never do anything productive. They cause more feminist backlash which only increases their problem even more and the ones that are ultimately hurt are the millions of innocent men, women and children that get caught in the crossfire of these ongoing gender wars. The innocent men, women and children who didn’t start these wars and have never done wrong. They are the ones who end up suffering.

The MRA will bite back at any woman who claims to have been raped or abused. He will say she’s lying. She’s just trying to separate him from his children or get the upper hand because she wants his money or has her own ax to grind. Now every time a woman is abused or even claims she is abused she has no choice but to turn to feminism. They’ll help her they promise. They’ll make sure she’s believed and justice is served! The lies continue, the wars continue, the fighting continues and never ends. It never occurs to the MRA to take charge of things. He instead want to play without ever having to pay.

He could have chosen from the beginning to assert his authority. The women would have been protected by the mans responsibility and he would have been protected by being in charge of the woman’s actions. His family might have stayed together, his wife and kids might have never been impoverished. Hs children might have had a stable home to live in. But the MRA man can’t put his foot down and lay out the rules within his family. Instead he presses for laws that would just make everything a little more fair and would relieve him of responsibility. He instead runs a hate campaign against women and conducts a marriage strike. He refuses to be a man and complains that women won’t be faithful, that they won’t be women.

The MRA story is a tragic one indeed. It started with feminist harm of women, which led to lies and harm of men which led to lies and harm against all while society collapsed around all this hate and fighting. There will probably never be a happy ever after to this story and it’s a real shame. Because if the MRA hadn’t fled from responsibility in the first place this never would have happened.

1. “The Garbage Generation” by Daniel Amneus
2. Ibid.

Advertisements

What’s in a Name?

When I first started blogging I was fairly new to the world of anti-feminism. I didn’t really know all that much. I had just studied history and knew what was going on in the world from my own personal observations. My purpose of blogging was (and still is) to help women. My purpose here has never been to write about or deal with “men’s issues.” Men’s issues certainly do exist (as do women’s and children’s and so on) but they are not my purpose. The reason why I am saying this is because I have given a lot of thought here lately to the term anti-feminist. I have given a lot of thought to what exactly is in a name. I have been attacked so much since I started blogging. I honestly never imagined I would garner so much attention or what I was saying would be that controversial. Well, I knew there would be a whole lineup of dissenters but I just never expected to get the kind of audience that I have. The biggest thing I have discovered is that the liberals are quick to attack me for standing up for the rights women have lost in the past 40-50 years and the conservatives just simply ignore me. I have even had many conservatives promoting feminist ideas that conservatives would have shunned entirely 50 years ago.

I have kind of re-done my profile to call myself a traditionalist, or someone who stands for traditional gender roles. Identifying as “anti-feminist” has weighed very heavily on my mind and heart here lately and it has been bothering me quite a bit. Not because I am for feminism (I’m not, which I’ve explained and continue to explain over and over) but simply because of the attention I have attracted throughout the time I have been blogging and the kind of attention the term “anti-feminist” generates.

The real problem is the perception society has about feminism. Most assume it did nothing but help women and not care about (or actually hurt) men. This isn’t true, of course, but most average every-day citizens do not realize this. They do not realize that feminists generally used male plaintiffs until they had invalidated all laws that gave common-sense protections and advantages to women. The do not realize that it is generally feminists who think it is so unfair for men to have traditional responsibilities for women and children. In fact it has mainly been feminists who have told me my writings are “sexist” against men for saying that a man should support his wife.

As I have identified myself as an “anti-feminist” I feel as though I have been alienating the very women I have been trying to help throughout all of this time and have been attracting men who either hate women completely or would love to have a traditional woman without having to assume traditional responsibilities for her.

I had one woman come to my page and I could tell that she was really torn up inside. She told me about how she had grown up around men who treated women like they were inferior. I pleaded with her to please just hear me out, that I was against feminism because of the way it has hurt women and I was trying to help. But she wouldn’t listen. She didn’t want to hear any of it. She never stayed long enough for me to tell her that I knew exactly what she was feeling and that I too had been in her shoes once.

On the other hand I have been attracting the attention of so many men who adore traditional women. Yet they turn around and whine and cry about “sexism” when they can’t get things their way and they talk about “discrimination” (while at the same time promoting it where it pleases them, of course). They don’t want women in combat, yet they want them registered for the draft. They don’t want to change a single diaper, yet they always want custody of the children. They want a housewife, yet they don’t want to pay alimony. The list goes on and on. One of the most ridiculous examples occurred when I was interacting on a site where MRAs frequented constantly. A friend of mine asked “Men: Would it be better if all women said they didn’t want equality and instead just wanted to be traditional?” All of a sudden the thread was flooded with MRAs praising traditional women and saying “yeah, yeah!” and “that would be ideal, yes.” They went nuts over it. I don’t think I saw a single one of them that wasn’t praising the idea of women being traditional and saying that was their idea of a dream girl. Well, soon the fun was over and they all went back to screaming “sexism” and “discrimination” and “where’s our equality,” etc… I have attracted the attention of a lot MRAs who claim to want tradition yet want to point out every single area where men are, supposedly, discriminated against.

I wrote to Phyllis Schlafly last year. I asked her couple of questions and, in a polite way, asked her why she no longer cared about women. I thanked her for her movement many years ago against the ERA and told her that life would undoubtedly be much harder for young women such as myself today if it wasn’t for what she had done. Two weeks later she responded, in all caps, saying that she has always stood up for us. She and Suzanne Venker collaborated together to write a new book, flipside of feminism, a couple of years ago. I was excited to read the book when I first got it because I knew that Schlafly had done great work in the past to protect a woman’s sacred position within the home and family.

My excitement was short lived, however, as I soon began to develop this sour feeling in my gut as I began to read. At first I thought, “great, she’s giving a good history about feminism” but when I got towards the end of the book, she and Venker had done a complete 180 and had joined the ranks of the MRAs. First they say women should be traditional and they promote “sexism” then at the end they complain about alleged “sexism.” There was so much bull**** I actually had to get a pair of waders just to make it to the end of the book. Since society does not accept tradition anymore, I figure that those like Schlafly join up with MRAs to punish women who dare leave traditional roles as it is the only thing society will accept anymore. They know feminists can’t, and won’t, stand against what they are saying (unless it involves the workforce or abortion) because they are too afraid of women being sent back into traditional roles if they say anything about women being protected in marriage or in their roles as mothers. They know they can hit women hard and nobody will come to their rescue.

Yes, I am against feminism- truly against feminism- but calling myself an anti-feminist has become a very painful thing for me. I really and truly want to stand up for women because nobody is. We are so far gone as a culture that many conservatives don’t even care about women being slaughtered in combat and a child being taken from its mother’s breast is seen as progressive because it is politically correct. It is “equality.”

At times feminism has done good things. In the 1800s feminists worked hard to secure protections for women and children. They worked hard to secure a family wage so women could be home with their children instead of being exploited in factories and they worked hard to turn the law away from seeing children as the property of fathers and financial assets to the family. Occasionally I have acknowledged things even modern feminism has done. However, these good things are very few. Often I find feminists tell half-truths. I find myself agreeing with many issues feminists put forth. I know first hand how hard it is for women who have been raped and abused. I know that nobody wants to believe women and I know most women have a hard time getting any kind of justice at all, and that most men never pay for raping and abusing women. But I also know that, while feminism has changed a couple of laws to better protect women, their movement has helped to erase hundreds more that had helped and protected women for generations.

Calling myself an anti-feminist or identifying as an anti-feminist has become painful because of how far downhill society has gone. Ultimately a name is what society makes it. The term anti-feminist is almost completely used to describe those associated with the men’s movement or those who are extremely conservative far beyond even my own views. 50 years ago everyone would have known that I was standing up for women’s role in the family and legal protections if I called myself an anti-feminist. But, now, all I get is hypocritical MRAs.

I am not an anti-feminist in the sense of the way that name is used today. I am a Traditional Women’s Right Activist. I stand up for the rights that women once had before feminism. I stand for our maternal rights and our role in the home. All fit and loving mothers deserve to be able to raise and care for their young children and expect that the father will do his part and provide financial support. I do not stand for “equal treatment” of males and females because it is illogical and a complete fantasy. Men will never have the responsibilities women have no matter how gender-neutralized our laws are. You MRAs complain about boys being treated like girls in the schools yet how do you think women feel being treated like men within family law or the military? This gender-neutral craze of the past 40 years is just plain stupidity. It doesn’t work and it never will. We can say all we want that a woman should just “man up” and get over it or that men should learn to love housework. But, at the end of the day it is only a mess that we are creating.

I talk about feminism because history is important. Women need to know the truth about the women’s movement over the decades. They also need to know about these men’s groups that generally operate very quietly (until recently anyways) so as not to arouse public opposition. The main reason they have been successful at taking advantage of the direction the women’s movement was going is because of how low-key they stayed. The divorce revolution swept through society with barely any media attention or press coverage at all and these men’s groups were right there in the background, along with their gender neutralized feminist allies, to take advantage of the whole thing. If more women understood history (true history) it would change their attitudes and perceptions today. If feminists had a change of heart and truly started looking out for the best interests of women and children I would stand with them in a heartbeat. But, until that day comes, no good is to come from either feminism or anti-feminism.

Women Should Look Very Carefully at What Feminism Has Done

Unlike the feminists who are constantly concerned with lesbian issues, the “wage gap” and pushing women further into combat. This site is concerned with the every-day issues that most heterosexual women actually care about. No woman, if she knew what feminism was about, would actually support it. Especially those housewives who defend feminism. Feminism has wiped out the legal safeguards and laws that sheltered a woman from her husband’s burdens and easy divorces. In order to force women into the workforce the feminists campaigned against alimony and child custody protections for women because, in their delusional minds, these protections were “holding women back.” But, holding us back from what? From whom? How many women would actually be happy with losing their children for a career? Now that this is becoming more common in our society I don’t see any evidence that women are happy about this. How many women would really want to remain in the home with no protections should she be abandoned by her husband? How many women or men would want their pregnant daughter to be threatened with a custody battle as soon as she gives birth by a man that refuses to marry and support her and the child? As this has become more common since women’s lib women have been forced to abandon their homes for the workforce and even abandon any support they might have otherwise gotten for themselves and their children. Women used to have a choice to work, but now they do not. Women used to have various legal rights and protections that now they do not. Men’s groups are just a product of the feminist movement. Feminists more often than not supported their issues in the 1960s through the 1980s but when they saw how much “equal treatment” was quickly harming women a lot of feminists backed out. Of course, mainstream feminism apparently hasn’t gotten the message as they are still ignoring the issues that real women face everyday. As normal, they do not speak for ordinary, everyday women.

And for those women, especially housewives, who still think feminism has been good for them. I encourage you to look carefully into the history of this movement and what has happened in the last 40 years. The best all-around example of feminist stupidity can be found in feminist Jane Mansbridge’s book “Why We Lost the ERA.”

© 2013 What’s Wrong With Equal Rights. Reproduction in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.

My review of “Feminist Fantasies”

This is my review of Phyllis Schlafly’s book “Feminist Fantasies”

This book is kind of like a history about the women’s “liberation” movement and letters Schlafly wrote and the history of the things that happened. Nobody ever questions this thing called “equal rights.” Many people have not looked into it far enough to realize the agonizing effects it has really had on our society and the lives of millions of women, children and even men.I have heard some women think the assertion that women’s liberation has actually harmed women was simply the most ridiculous think they ever heard. Even I never really thought about things until after I had a child. It was only then that I really longed to understand why I was put at such a disadvantage. It seemed that nobody cared that women and men are indeed different and that women do things that men do not. We carry burdens that men do not. I didn’t understand that we used to have laws that PROTECTED us from men that wanted to take advantage of us and exploit us in many different ways. It seemed that making us all “equal” in the eyes of the law and treating a woman the same as a man was not only putting women at a disadvantage in multiple areas of life (think forced military service)but also similar to allowing an adult to pick on a child (think men exploiting women).

I have been a housewife for years and anytime I talk about how my husband has always taken care of us and provided for us everyone always talks about how I MUST have some way to support myself because, hey, he could take off and leave at anytime then how would I survive? What some of them apparently don’t understand is that the only reason a man is able to do that is because of the women’s liberation. The very laws that used to protect us are either 1) not in existence anymore or 2) routinely used against us BY men. When I truly came to the understanding of things and really learned our history and how the women’s movement (that was supposed to “liberate” us and give us all kinds of wonderful rights) had simply left us out there without any protection, the truth was enough to practically bring me to my knees. My heart literally cries inside for what we have truly lost and what women’s liberation has truly ripped away from us. I see girls everyday being taken advantage of. Nobody cares that our entertainment many times consists of men bashing, making false allegations and calling women every name in the book (something that used to be illegal). Even my own mother was taken advantage of by my dad (who was in his 30s when they married while she was only 18). Instead of being required to provide for his wife he controlled her and took advantage of her in every way possible (something he could not have done before women’s liberation).

I am so thankful that someone like Schlafly was there to stand up for women. Even though the ERA never did pass (thanks in large part to Schlafly) that didn’t stop equal rights fanatics and feminists from going on a rampage to make all laws gender neutral (no matter how absurd, unjust and illogical it is). It seems as though nobody has the courage to stand up for women anymore and the injustice the women’s movement has done to us. It just makes you wonder what the future holds…

 

© 2012 What’s Wrong With Equal Rights. Reproduction in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.

How the Feminist Movement Hurt Women

IT HAS RIPPED THE LAWS OFF THE BOOKS REQUIRING THAT A HUSBAND SUPPORT HIS WIFE AND PROVIDE HER WITH A HOME TO LIVE IN

IT HAS DESTROYED CHIVALRY IN MEN

IT HAS MADE FAMILY LAW SEX NEUTRAL WHICH MEANS WIVES AND MOTHERS NOW CAN BE LEGALLY FORCED TO CARRY THE TRADITIONAL BURDENS OF MEN

IT HAS MADE WOMEN EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF THE FAMILY AND THE DEBTS OF HER HUSBAND AS WELL AS HERSELF

ATTEMPTS AT DRAFTING WOMEN

CONSTANT PRESSURE TO PUSH WOMEN FURTHER INTO COMBAT AND MANY WOMEN ARE ALREADY SERVING IN COMBAT

NO-FAULT DIVORCE

NO FINANCIAL SECURITY FOR THE HOUSEWIFE

ABOLITION OF THE TENDER YEARS DOCTRINE

DEPRIVATION OF COMMON LAW RIGHTS TO RECOVER DAMAGES FOR WRONGS SUCH AS BREACH OF PROMISE TO MARRY AND SEDUCTION

IT HAS TAKEN AWAY IMPORTANT EXEMPTIONS WOMEN USED TO HAVE UNDER THE LAW

SOCIETY SEES WOMEN AS FUNGIBLE WITH MEN

MEN VIEW WOMEN AS EQUALS AND NO LONGER SEE A NATURAL OBLIGATION TO SUPPORT AND PROTECT WOMEN

FEMINISM HAS MADE YOUNG WOMEN BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN HAVE EMOTION FREE SEX WITH NO CONSEQUENCE

GIRLS NO LONGER KNOW HOW TO SAY “NO” TO THEIR BOYFRIENDS

THE DEGRADATION OF THE HOUSEWIFE: HOUSEWIVES ARE “PARASITES” (De Beauvoir) THE HOUSE IS A “COMFORTABLE CONCENTRATION CAMP” (Friedan)

THE PRESSURE GIRLS GET FROM FAMILY AND SOCIETY TO BECOME CAREER WOMEN

MARRIAGE AND MOTHERHOOD IS NO LONGER A VALID CAREER OPTION FOR WOMEN

WOMEN NO LONGER VALUE THEIR FEMININITY INSTEAD THEY WANT TO BE MEN

THANKS TO FEMINISM IRRESPONSIBLE AND IMMORAL MEN NOW HAVE A FREE RIDE AT THE EXPENSE OF WOMEN

THERE IS NO LONGER A REQUIRED FAMILY WAGE WHICH IN THE PAST MADE IT EASIER FOR A WOMAN TO STAY HOME

IT IS NO LONGER SHAMEFUL FOR A MAN NOT TO SUPPORT HIS FAMILY

MEN ARE TAUGHT THAT WOMEN ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM THEM THEREFORE THIS CAUSES A LOT OF CONFLICT AND THE DIVORCE RATE IS SKYROCKETING

CHILDREN FROM SINGLE PARENT HOUSEHOLDS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BECOME CRIMINALS DUE TO THE LACK OF STRONG FATHER FIGURE:

SINGLE MOTHERS INSTEAD OF BEING MARRIED HAVE NOW TURNED TO THE GOVERNMENT: WHICH HAS BECOME A REPLACEMENT FOR A REAL FATHER

© 2012 What’s Wrong With Equal Rights. Reproduction in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.