Feminism as Psychological Warfare (Because @FFigureFBust Asked)

Posted on | April 18, 2016 | 28 Comments

While monitoring online feminism, I noticed someone had RT’d @FFigureFBust, posting a cartoon with this feminist “joke”:

Man: “You wear too much makeup.”
Woman: “You consume too much oxygen.”
Man: “It’s just my opinion, you’d look better withou–”
Woman: “So would you. Without oxygen.”
(pause)
Woman: “F–k your opinions.”

This is a variation of the feminist attack on “mansplaining,” made famous by Rebecca Solnit’s book Men Explain Things to Me. Despite all the caveats and disclaimers with which Ms. Solnit qualified her argument, it can be summarized as feminism’s two-word message to men: “SHUT UP!”

Feminism is ultimately about complete contempt for men, per se. If you are a man, nothing you say is of interest to any feminist. Everything men do is bad and everything men say is wrong. This categorical certainty — the absolute moral and intellectual inferiority of males — is so commonly accepted among feminists that none of them ever question it, because they never even notice it, for the same reason fish don’t notice water.

Saturday I published a 4,000-word exploration of this (“The Queering of Feminism and the Silencing of Heterosexual Masculinity”) showing how anti-male attitudes are fundamental to “feminist theory, which condemns heterosexuality as an oppressive ‘institution’ forcibly imposed on women by the social system of male domination known as patriarchy.”

Feminists believe all women collectively suffer from systemic oppression, and that all men participate in and benefit from this oppression, by which men obtain unjust privilege. It is not necessary for a man to say or do anything harmful in order for feminist to hate him. He is male, and therefore he can never deserve anything except hate. “Being constantly insulted by feminists . . . is something men are expected never to notice.”

Feminist rhetoric is a method of psychological warfare, intended to inspire all women to embrace this contemptuous attitude toward men, and also to demoralize and confuse the male enemy. Feminists deliberately insult men, falsely accusing them of complicity in wrongdoing, and if any man dares object to this kind of anti-male hate propaganda, his protest of innocence will be cited as proof of his guilt (a tactic known as “Kafkatrapping”). This is why feminism is actually not about equality, because if feminists believed men were equal, a man might be permitted to say a word in his own defense. Instead, feminist discourse is a constant stream of accusations against men, who have no right to respond to these insults. Like the accused in Stalin’s “show trials” of the 1930s, men are expected to confess their guilt, to denounce themselves for their crimes as vrag naroda, and to testify against others who were complicit in their counterrevolutionary plots.

So here was this cartoon posted by @FFigureFBust, a typical expression of feminist “humor” in which the punchline is “F–k your opinions.” Let the question be asked, “What kind of man would be such a fool as to tell a woman that she is wearing ‘too much makeup’?” Certainly no wise man would ever say this to a woman, not even to his own wife. However, men often do express a general dislike for “too much makeup,” preferring a more “natural” appearance. Of course, as any woman can explain, what some men praise as the “natural look” usually requires quite a bit of work to achieve, and a woman must be highly skilled in the use of makeup to make it seem as though she isn’t wearing makeup at all.

However, this cartoon isn’t really about makeup, is it?

Notice how this is ultimately the punch line of all feminist "jokes"? https://t.co/acCm4tBGkR pic.twitter.com/yrujHynRzO

— FreeStacy (@Not_RSMcCain) April 18, 2016

No, this cartoon is about “SHUT UP!”

The cartoon is intended to depict men generally as clueless and idiotic, and to convey the message that no woman should ever care about any man’s opinion. Feminists will often emphasize this disdain in regard to heterosexual male preferences about women’s appearance and behavior. Whatever it is that a heterosexual man may like or dislike about women, in particular or in general, no feminist ever wants him to say it. This has the effect, of course, of granting feminists an absolute monopoly in terms of offering advice to women. No matter how disastrous the result of following feminist advice may be (e.g., a herpes infection), feminists tell women that the patriarchy is to blame for these bad outcomes.

Now, as soon as I push the “publish” button on this, it will be as if I’ve lit the fuse on a hate-bomb. Some readers will say rude things about @FFigureFBust and, as a result, I will be accused of engaging in “harassment” and condoning “misogyny.” However, you see, it doesn’t matter what I say or do. Nothing will prevent feminists from slandering me, because I am a heterosexual male, after all, and what is feminist rhetoric except an endless slander campaign against heterosexual males?

All I can do is point to examples of feminism’s hateful rhetoric, analyze and describe the significance. My purpose is to inform readers who, although they probably understand that there is something profoundly wrong with feminist ideology, do not have the leisure to engage in this kind of in-depth analysis of feminist rhetoric. Without a proper analysis, however, men might make the mistake of arguing with a feminist, which is futile, because feminism is always a lecture, never a debate.

Well, when I called attention to @FFigureFBust’s feminist “joke,” this resulted in a brief colloquy in which I made the point that “feminists constantly lecture the world about their opinions, and permit no man to say a word in reply.” She asked why I had addressed her, but when I went to reply to that question . . . blocked. So here is your answer, Ms. Horne.

Does she understand my answer? Am I attempting to persuade her that she is wrong? No, because no feminist has ever admitted that she was wrong about anything. Merely by calling herself a feminist, she declares to the world her belief in her own omniscience. A feminist believes she knows everything about everything, and no man knows anything at all.

Here, watch her 17-minute video about feminism:

Has she stated her case persuasively? Would anyone care to transcribe her argument, such as it is? I got about 2 minutes in — “women are closer to my heart and are more relate-able to me” — before my eyes began to glaze over from the effort of trying to decode her British accent. She said something about female genital mutilation and girls being married off at age 11, as if anyone not named Omar or Mohammad might be in favor of such practices. This is sort of like environmentalists who declare they’re in favor of clean water, as if they expect someone to argue against clean water. Feminists are always going on about some obvious atrocity and declaring that anyone who disagrees with them is defending these atrocities. This is why feminists make blatantly false claims about the prevalence of rape (e.g., the 1-in-5 myth), in order to provoke their critics to express doubt about these claims, at which point, feminists accuse their critics of being pro-rape. Feminists believe they are entitled to invent any “fact” that will advance their agenda, and then engage in character assassination against anyone who objects to feminist lies.

The all-time classic of feminist dishonesty was the Great Super Bowl Domestic Violence Hoax of 1993, when it was claimed that Super Bowl Sunday was “the biggest day of the year for violence against women.” There was no evidence for this claim, and yet reporters rushed to print as fact that on the day of the NFL championship, domestic abuse hotlines were “flooded with more calls from victims than on any other day of the year,” to quote the Boston Globe. Christina Hoff Sommers exposed this lie and other examples of feminist myth-making in her 1994 book Who Stole Feminism? Yet despite the documented proof that feminists habitually lie, here we are more than 20 years later, still expected to pretend that feminism’s credibility is beyond question!

Never Take Advice From Feminists, unless your goal in life is to become a Crazy Cat Lady, which is one of the few subjects where feminist expertise is useful. “Feminism is a movement of crazy women, by crazy women, for crazy women,” and you should doubt the mental health of any woman who calls herself a feminist. Therefore, never talk to a feminist:

Guys: Learn to take a hint. Learn to walk away.
If a woman tells you she is a feminist, say nothing and walk away.
No feminist wants to hear what a man has to say, and life is too short to waste your time taking to feminists. Just walk away.
Leave feminists alone, and then they can complain about that.

Every day, feminists prove there is no point in arguing with them, and anyone attempting to argue with @FFigureFBust will be blocked. Because she is a feminist, you may be sure that she will never acknowledge what I’ve written here in reply to her question. Feminist “success” requires them to pretend that there is no valid criticism of their ideology, nor any reason why intelligent people should oppose their agenda. Feminism is a cult which claims a monopoly on truth, and no member of the cult can admit the possibility that anyone outside the feminist cult is qualified to dispute this monopolgy. Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It, and the silencing of men is necessary to the movement’s triumph. Well, good luck trying to shut me up.

Category: Sex Trouble

Comments

28 Responses to “Feminism as Psychological Warfare (Because @FFigureFBust Asked)”

Feminism as Psychological Warfare (Because @FFigureFBust Asked) : The Other McCain | MGTOW 2.0
April 18th, 2016 @ 9:39 pm

[…] Source: Feminism as Psychological Warfare (Because @FFigureFBust Asked) : The Other McCain […]
concern00
April 18th, 2016 @ 10:08 pm

Eleanor Abernathy aka crazy cat lady is actually a pretty good summation of the life story of a feminist.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
April 18th, 2016 @ 10:37 pm

Charming creatures! Not as warm and cozy as scorpions…
RS
April 18th, 2016 @ 10:41 pm

The philosophical inconsistency is absolutely marvelous.

The “Male Gaze?” Problematic because “Objectification.”

The Madison Avenue inspired fashion? Problematic because it doesn’t accept women as individuals. See, e.g. “Fat shaming, etc.”

“I like you the way you are without all that stuff?” Shut up!

And they wonder why we don’t take them along when we need to buy a car.
Finrod Felagund
April 18th, 2016 @ 10:56 pm

Logic, reason and consistency are just creations of the patriarchy whose only purpose is to oppress women, don’t you know. (/sarcasm)
Joe Joe
April 18th, 2016 @ 11:36 pm

Here is where the word “discrimination” would come in handy. Women should not listen to just any man’s advice, but discriminate between those they should listen to (their fathers, brothers, husbands, preachers etc.) and those they should not (abusers, con men, drunks at bars, etc.)

Feminism’s biggest crime is that it cannot and does not discriminate between all the different male voices. According to feminism, the opinions of ALL men are equally stupid and valueless, whether the male in question is a loving father or a flasher on the subway. This means that women are not permitted to discriminate between the voices that help or harm them.
Joe Joe
April 19th, 2016 @ 12:41 am

Aided and abetted by the university:

Harvard Crimson ad warns prospective female students they ‘will’ be raped
http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=7503

“The Harvard Crimson has set aside space in its daily print edition for a controversial advertisement that warns incoming freshmen about the likelihood of being raped in college.

The ad, produced by an organization known as “Don’t Accept Rape” and later obtained by Campus Reform, puts a dark spin on the familiar college acceptance letter by citing rape as one of the many experiences offered to students at the company’s made-up institution….”
Fail Burton
April 19th, 2016 @ 1:55 am

In order to mainstream hate speech into the public arena which is centered around biological supremacy you need a spectrum with players at the two extreme ends.

At one end are hateful biological supremacist activist sociopaths who over time build up a comprehensive ideology full of semi-plausible demonization, scapegoating and conspiracy theories where the agreed upon meaning of words is destroyed until they fly around in circles at the service of said ideology. History is altered and memory-holed. The target is another biological group.

At the other end, the key component which allows hate speech to go wide is naivete. One must be ignorant enough to confuse institutional discrimination with the fetishization of biological groups of people. That con game is necessary because those are in fact polar opposites. Falsely claiming oppression is a Trojan Horse for supremacists, not an anti-oppression or civil rights movement. In the case of intersectional gay feminism, the next thing you know is you have targeted groups of naive men, whites and heterosexuals agreeing with their own marginalization and segregation. In an analogy, everything is the fault of Jews and the public arena must be made Jew-free.

Third Wave Feminists make no secret of the fact that everything they see as emerging from “whiteness” or the norms of heterosexuality must be destroyed.

Another key component is men, whites and heterosexuals must be divorced from being mere biological groups of people and instead transformed into artificial ideologies or cultures so supremacists can claim they are not critiquing straight white males, but instead “compulsory heterosexuality,” “rape culture,” and “white male privilege.” Hannah Arendt once claimed the great success of the Nazis was to transform Jews into Marxists, and then attack Marxism, a thing which persists to this very day. In this process, an ideology is transformed into an entire innocent oppressed biological group and an innocent biological group is transformed into an ideology. It can be extremely clever and effective propaganda in which the oppressed “street wise” tell their tales of woe to the naive who are dazzled by a race-sex which are so exotic straight white males can never understand that experience and therefore have no voice. #JustListen is the order of the day.
Travis
April 19th, 2016 @ 2:42 am

Nailed it. Just last week I tried to lure a feminist into an actual debate. She agreed to a discussion. I asked why she thought feminism was still needed in the west. The first thing she did was send me an info graphic saying that “Only 8 out of every 100 rapes are ever reported”. I asked her if the other 92 WEREN’T reported, how did she know they happened?
“……… It…It’s not my job to educate you! Goodbye!”
Blocked.
The only way feminism can stay relevant is to completely block all dissenting opinion and debate.
Fail Burton
April 19th, 2016 @ 4:48 am

Feminists have a parallel criminal justice system which “knows” these things. That’s why we have special Star Chambers for men at college which are beyond the reach of law.
robertstacymccain
April 19th, 2016 @ 4:50 am

Feminism is organized against … what?

PATRIARCHY — the influence of fathers.

Depriving fathers of influence over their own children has been the goal of feminism for more than 50 years. And therefore the last place any feminist wants young women to seek advice is their own fathers. Furthermore, feminism advocates abortion on demand, so that men have no influence even in the question of whether they become fathers at all. Feminists advocate divorce (depriving fathers of influence in their children’s homes) and feminists advocate forcing fathers to pay child support even for children conceived by women they never married, so that the man is reduced to the role of bill-paying sperm donor for unwed mothers over whose choices they have no influence.

This deliberate annihilation of paternal influence is what feminism is all about. No one who supports feminism has any respect for the role of fathers. Feminists view males as inferior.
Robert What?
April 19th, 2016 @ 8:30 am

Personally I couldn’t care less about what a feminist thinks or says. The problem is that they have the attention of those with power over us – both political and economic.
physicsnut
April 19th, 2016 @ 8:30 am

Since today is Patriot’s day
just wondering what they would think of it all

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriots'_Day
http://www.boston-discovery-guide.com/patriots-day.html
Deuteronomy 28
“The alien who is among you shall rise above you higher and higher, but you will go down lower and lower. He shall lend to you, but you will not lend to him; he shall be the head, and you will be the tail.”

Mencken says:
“Americans constitute the most timorous, sniveling, poltroonish, ignominious mob of serfs and goose-steppers ever gathered under one flag in Christendom …”
Finrod Felagund
April 19th, 2016 @ 9:26 am

A former roommate’s ditzy but all-too-self-assured girlfriend (who amongst other oddities was convinced that one of our friends was a “psychic vampire” and always kept a stake by our front door in case she had to kill him one day) tried telling me that “while 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + 1/64 + … = 1 in some mathematical sense, us liberal arts majors know that isn’t true.”

She didn’t appreciate it when I told her that the mathematical sense was the only one that mattered– and as a math major in college, I know these things.
CrustyB
April 19th, 2016 @ 9:34 am

You have to respect an idealogy that thinks saying “f*&k” makes you strong and righteous. And by “respect” I mean “laugh, point and shake your head.”
Feminism as Psychological Warfare (Because @FFigureFBust Asked) | Living in Anglo-America
April 19th, 2016 @ 11:13 am

[…] Feminism as Psychological Warfare (Because @FFigureFBust Asked) […]
Adobe_Walls
April 19th, 2016 @ 11:45 am

A wise man once said that they ”should be mocked and mocked often by someone who knows how”.
Guest
April 19th, 2016 @ 11:46 am

A man apologized to me uneccessarily the other day. So now they’re taking that away from us too. #manpologizing

In all seriousness, I’ve learned so much from your blog. I hit the tip jar as often as I can. Thank you for your work!
Evi L. Bloggerlady
April 19th, 2016 @ 12:17 pm

https://twitter.com/MsEBL/status/722469769140568064 We have seen lesbian feminists freak over transgenders, I suspect we will see more of this…
robertstacymccain
April 19th, 2016 @ 1:04 pm

God bless you, ma’am!
robertstacymccain
April 19th, 2016 @ 1:04 pm

Yes, I resemble that remark.
Joe Joe
April 19th, 2016 @ 2:16 pm

Even feminists have fathers. My guess is that they run to them for money when the wheat grass juice runs out.
Quartermaster
April 19th, 2016 @ 2:17 pm

About like a snake that’s a combination of a Krait and the personality of a Rattlesnake.
JosephBleau
April 19th, 2016 @ 2:18 pm

Well, she’s got a point. We all know that women very rarely, if ever, share their unwanted opinions about the appearance of men or other women. AMIRITE?
Daniel O'Brien
April 19th, 2016 @ 2:22 pm

Your quote about “women being closer to her heart” was wrong. I believe she said “women things (issues) being closer to her heart”.
DeadMessenger
April 19th, 2016 @ 8:01 pm

I have no problem believing that one of your friends was a psychic vampire, is the thing.
DeadMessenger
April 19th, 2016 @ 8:03 pm

Do you have to wear that shirt? It’s not a good color for you.
Beatriz Terry
April 20th, 2016 @ 3:54 am

“my room mate Lori Is getting paid on the internet 98$/hr”…..!ca475ctwo days ago grey MacLaren P1 I bought after earning 18,512 DoIIars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k DoIIars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over. hourly 87 DoIIars…Learn. More right Here !ca475n:?:?:???? http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsPartnerGetPayHourly$98…. .??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??:??::::::!ca475n….,..