Freethinker's corner

I will not go quietly into the night!

recent posts

about

  • Feminism is Marxism is Fascism … May 5, 2014

    “Shaming tactics.”  This phrase is familiar to many Men’s Rights Activists.  It conjures up the histrionic behavior of female detractors who refuse to argue their points with logic.  Yet women are not the only ones guilty of using shaming tactics against men.  Male gynocentrists use them, too. (Male gynocentrists are males who place females at the top of the hierarchal ladder)

    Shaming tactics are emotional devices meant to play on a man’s insecurities and shut down debate.  They are meant to elicit sympathy for women and to demonize men who ask hard questions.  Most, if not all, shaming tactics are basically ad homimem attacks.

    Anyway, it might be helpful to categorize the major shaming tactics that are used against men whenever a discussion arises about feminism, men’s issues, romance, etc.  The following list contains descriptions of shaming tactics, some examples of quotes employing the tactics, and even color-coded aliases for mnemonic purposes.  Enjoy.

    Charge of Irascibility (Code Red)

    Discussion: The target is accused of having anger management issues.  Whatever negative emotions he has are assumed to be unjustifiable.  Examples:

    · “You’re bitter!”

    · “You need to get over your anger at women.”

    · “You are so negative!”

    Response: Anger is a legitimate emotion in the face of injustice.   It is important to remember that passive acceptance of evil is not a virtue.

    Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow)

    Discussion: The target is accused of having an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women.  Examples:

    · “You need to get over your fear.”

    · “Step up and take a chance like a man!”

    · “You’re afraid of a strong woman!”

    Response: It is important to remember that there is a difference between bravery and stupidity.  The only risks that reasonable people dare to take are calculated risks.  One weighs the likely costs and benefits of said risks.  As it is, some men are finding out that many women fail a cost-benefit analysis.

    Charge of Hypersensitivity (Code Blue) – The Crybaby Charge

    Discussion: The target is accused of being hysterical or exaggerating the problems of men (i.e., he is accused of playing “Chicken Little”).  Examples:

    · “Stop whining!”

    · “Get over it!”

    · “Suck it up like a man!”

    · “You guys don’t have it as nearly as bad as us women!”

    · “You’re just afraid of losing your male privileges.”

    · “Your fragile male ego …”

    · “Wow!  You guys need to get a grip!”

    Response: One who uses the Code Blue shaming tactic reveals a callous indifference to the humanity of men.  It may be constructive to confront such an accuser and ask if a certain problem men face needs to be addressed or not (“yes” or “no”), however small it may be seem to be.  If the accuser answers in the negative, it may constructive to ask why any man should care about the accuser’s welfare since the favor will obviously not be returned.  If the accuser claims to be unable to do anything about the said problem, one can ask the accuser why an attack is necessary against those who are doing something about it.

    Charge of Puerility (Code Green) – The Peter Pan Charge

    Discussion: The target is accused of being immature and/or irresponsible in some manner that reflects badly on his status as an adult male.  Examples:

    · “Grow up!”

    · “You are so immature!”

    · “Do you live with your mother?”

    · “I’m not interested in boys.  I’m interested in real men.”

    · “Men are shirking their God-given responsibility to marry and bear children.”

    Response: It should be remembered that one’s sexual history, marital status, parental status, etc. are not reliable indicators of maturity and accountability.  If they were, then we would not hear of white collar crime, divorce, teen sex, unplanned pregnancies, extramarital affairs, etc.

    Charge of Endangerment (Code Orange) – The Elevated Threat Charge

    Discussion: The target is accused of being a menace in some undefined manner.  This charge may be coupled with some attempt to censor the target.  Examples:

    · “You guys are scary.”

    · “You make me feel afraid.”

    Response: It may be constructive to point out that only bigots and tyrants are afraid of having the truth expressed to them.  One may also ask why some women think they can handle leadership roles if they are so threatened by a man’s legitimate freedom of expression. (I personally have had this one used on me just a couple of weeks ago by a woman)

    Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) – The Sour Grapes Charge

    Discussion: The target is accused of explaining away his own failures and/or dissatisfaction by blaming women for his problems.  Example:

    · “You are just bitter because you can’t get laid.”

    Response: In this case, it must be asked if it really matters how one arrives at the truth.  In other words, one may submit to the accuser, “What if the grapes really are sour?”  At any rate, the Code Purple shaming tactic is an example of what is called “circumstantial ad hominem.”

    Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) – The Brown Shirts Charge

    Discussion: The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint.  Examples:

    · “You’re one of those right-wing wackos.”

    · “You’re an extremist”

    · “You sound like the KKK.”

    · “… more anti-feminist zaniness”

    Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it.  Whether or not certain ideas are “out of the mainstream” is besides the point.  A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of “False Compromise”).

    Charge of Invirility (Code Lavender)

    Discussion: The target’s sexual orientation or masculinity is called into question.  Examples:

    · “Are you gay?”

    · “I need a real man, not a sissy.”

    · “You’re such a wimp.”

    Response: Unless one is working for religious conservatives, it is usually of little consequence if a straight man leaves his accusers guessing about his sexual orientation.

    Charge of Overgeneralization (Code Gray)

    Discussion: The target is accused of making generalizations or supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women.  Examples:

    · “I’m not like that!”

    · “Stop generalizing!”

    · “That’s a sexist stereotype!”

    Response: One may point out that feminists and many other women make generalizations about men.  Quotations from feminists, for example, can be easily obtained to prove this point.  Also, one should note that pointing to a trend is not the same as overgeneralizing.  Although not all women may have a certain characteristic, a significant amount of them might.

    Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)

    Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general. Examples:

    · “You misogynist creep!”

    · “Why do you hate women?”

    · “Do you love your mother?”

    · “You are insensitive to the plight of women.”

    · “You are mean-spirited.”

    · “You view women as doormats.”

    · “You want to roll back the rights of women!!”

    · “You are going to make me cry.”

    Response: One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are “not a zero-sum game”).  One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target’s viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of “argumentum ad misericordiam” (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or“argumentum in terrorem” (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).

    Charge of Instability (Code White) – The White Padded Room Charge

    Discussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable.  Examples:

    · “You’re unstable.”

    · “You have issues.”

    · “You need therapy.”

    · “Weirdo!”

    Response: In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target’s mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.

    Charge of Selfishness (Code Silver)

    Discussion: This attack is self-explanatory.  It is a common charge hurled at men who do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits.  Examples:

    · “You are so materialistic.”

    · “You are so greedy.”

    Response: It may be beneficial to turn the accusation back on the one pressing the charge.  For instance, one may retort, “So you are saying I shouldn’t spend my money on myself, but should instead spend it on a woman like you —and you accuse me of being selfish?? Just what were you planning to do for me anyway?”

    Charge of Superficiality (Code Gold) – The All-That-Glitters Charge

    Discussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences.  Examples:

    · “If you didn’t go after bimbos, then …”

    · “How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?”

    Response: Average-looking women can be just as problematic in their behavior as beautiful, “high-maintenance” women. Regarding the shallowness of women, popular media furnishes plenty of examples where petty demands are made of men by females (viz., those notorious laundry lists of things a man should/should not do for his girlfriend or wife).

    Charge of Unattractiveness (Code Tan) – The Ugly Tan Charge

    Discussion: The target is accused of having no romantic potential as far as women are concerned.  Examples:

    · “I bet you are fat and ugly.”

    · “You can’t get laid!”

    · “Creep!”

    · “Loser!”

    · “Have you thought about the problem being you?”

    Response: This is another example of “circumstantial ad hominem.”  The target’s romantic potential ultimately does not reflect on the merit of his arguments.

    Charge of Defeatism (Code Maroon)

    Discussion: This shaming tactic is akin to the Charge of Irascibility and the Charge of Cowardice in that the accuser attacks the target’s negative or guarded attitude about a situation.  However, the focus is not so much on the target’s anger or fear, but on the target’s supposed attitude of resignation.  Examples:

    · “Stop being so negative.”

    · “You are so cynical.”

    · “If you refuse to have relationships with women, then you are admitting defeat.”

    · “C’mon! Men are doers, not quitters.”

    Response: The charge of defeatism can be diffused by explaining that one is merely being realistic about a situation.  Also, one can point out that asking men to just accept their mistreatment at the hands of women and society is the real attitude that is defeatist.  Many men have not lost their resolve; many have lost their patience.

    Threat of Withheld Affection (Code Pink) – The Pink Whip

    Discussion: The target is admonished that his viewpoints or behavior will cause women to reject him as a mate.  Examples:

    · “No woman will marry you with that attitude.”

    · “Creeps like you will never get laid!”

    Response: This is an example of the logical fallacy “argumentum ad baculum” (the “appeal to force”).  The accuser attempts to negate the validity of a position by pointing to some undesirable circumstance that will befall anyone who takes said position.  Really, the only way to deal with the “Pink Whip” is to realize that a man’s happiness and worth is not based on his romantic conquests (including marriage).

    Reprinted from (http://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/shaming-tactics/)

  • The Chase … April 27, 2014

    Are you planning to die? Has some sort of vigil been established in your waning years wherein you are sitting, looking out the window perhaps, waiting for the grim reaper to appear? Maybegrim reaper 2 you have already made your final plans, bought the grave site and the casket. Perhaps, in depressed anticipation you have finalized your personal affairs.

    No, you do not have a terminal disease, no insurmountable pain. No, your last doctor’s appointment and subsequent examination did not forecast a gloomy future. You have reached a certain oldage, you think, where the end has to be near, it just has to. So you have given up life, for what’s the use. You’ll be dead soon anyway.

    No plans have been made beyond the day. No plans, in fact, have been made at all. Your continued existence is a waste of time. You have made your final preparations and it’s time to go.tombstone

    Do you linger like this?

    Many people have depression worthy of thoughts about the end. Usually, though, such thoughts originate due to some affliction, a life-ending disease, or agony. Yours, however, has nothing to do with those. You have simply reached an age where you think nothing more death thinkingcan or should be done. In the absence of any organic malady you have simply started thinking yourself to death.

    Why not instead savor each moment of your remaining seconds? Why not instead live each moment as if the next moment will most certainly arrive?happy
    I think I would rather keel over during some activity planned, rather than be sitting, waiting to keel over.
    So make your plans, even years in advance, chasing deatheven if you know that death is chasing you and could be waiting round the next corner.
    Make death chase you, don’t wait for it to catch up.


     

  • Spam

    Of what value are all these comments that land in my spam folder? Do they get seen by anyone? Do they generate traffic somehow? I dispose of them, just did 18, and they are gone, but are they really? I have noticed a hefty upsurge in these spam type comments. Has anyone else?

  • Hiatus

    Lengthy …..

  • What Incredible Arrogance! …. March 31, 2014

    This post is about procreation, reproduction, and a feminist’s insistence that a man should have no part other than contributing his genetic material.

    Feminist’s insist that abortion be an “on demand” right and that men should have no say one way or another as to its use. They insist that there is no circumstance where a man should have a say whether a fetus is aborted or whether it is not. In addition, they assert, women should initiate any romantic encounter for otherwise it is to be considered possible sexual harassment.

    Feminism is about control, total control of society, men in particular. Feminism as a movement was never about equality, it has always been about supremacy, a supremacy that will precede the establishment of a matriarchy. If the feminist movement had been about equality it would have dissolved long ago, years ago, when equality was achieved. Now, through laws established by the misnamed “Gender Equity Act” and others, women have special privileges and considerations.

    If women want total control of their bodies then they should keep their bodies to themselves and never share them with anyone, it’s only fair, as this is the same admonishment men are given about sex. “If you don’t want to pay, don’t play.”

    If a man should not have a say as to whether an abortion would or would not be done then should the woman elect to have the child be born the man should have no financial or legal responsibility whatsoever. It’s only fair.

    If a woman should lie about taking a contraceptive so that she could become pregnant even though the man does not want to become a father, he should bear no financial or legal obligation. If a man is wearing a condom and it breaks and the woman gets pregnant he should be able to demand she get an abortion, or, bear no financial or legal obligation should she refuse.

    Either give men a say in what happens to a conceived fetus or keep your bodies to yourselves, you freaking feminists!

     

  • Fiddling While Rome Burns ….

    Men just do not want to hear it. The fact that their wives and daughters are part of an organization whose goal is to emasculate him and other males is not something they seem able to comprehend. So the movement continues, inexorably, tragically, on and on.

    I wonder at what point some men will turn their heads and wonder what happened to their freedoms, their right of self-determination, their dignity, their right to be men?

    I have made a prediction that the time men may finally realize that his life is not his own any more will be in about ten years, give or take a year. I stand by that. Men will look, perhaps remember the warnings I kept sounding, but it will be too late. The chains will be permanently on his wrists and the shackles on his ankles.

    I sincerely hope I am dead by then.

    (Feminists are immature females, not women. It would be an insult to women to call a feminist a woman. Feminists distain womanhood and motherhood)

  • Screw the Environment, he said.

    Rob Portman

  • Feminism: Not the Movement You Thought It Was … March 24, 2014

    Thanks to the feminist movement in a few decades men have gone from being respected protective members of the family to being depicted in TV and Movies as buffoons. You cannot name one recent program or movie where men are presented as responsible intelligent father figures. In tv sitcoms they may be good-hearted father figures but invariably they are depicted as immature, dumb, lazy, and incompetent.

    Does anyone seriously believe that this constant presentation of men in this fashion has no impact? Of course it does. Don’t you think young males watch television? Tv programs and commercials portray couples as having a smart and competent wife while the male part of the couple is an idiot. The days of Ward Cleaver are gone. Today the “new dad” is portrayed as unemployed, unaware, and totally emasculated.

    Men are routinely denigrated by women in film and print. For example, in an article in the New York Times author and journalist Natalie Angier wrote:

    “Women may not find this surprising, but one of the most persistent and frustrating problems in evolutionary biology is the male. Specifically … why doesn’t he just go away?”

    Maureen Dowd who wrote “Are Men Necessary?”, in an interview said,

    “Now that women don’t need men to reproduce and refinance, the question is, will we keep you around? And the answer is, ‘ You know, we need you in the way we need ice cream – you’ll be more ornamental.”

    Author Pamela Paul author of “Are Fathers Necessary?” wrote:

    “The bad news for Dad is that despite common perception, there’s nothing objectively essential about his contribution.”

    To get a true perspective on these quotes pretend a man said:

    “Men may not find this surprising, but one of the most persistent and frustrating problems in evolutionary biology is the female. Specifically … why doesn’t she just go away?”

    Do the same with the other quotes and you begin to see how heinous they are. Indeed, these, as well as other statements by women in powerful positions make it clear that there is no war on women, there is instead an all out assault, a war on men.

    The truth is … the patriarchy the feminists tell women they must fight against… never existed. Men never oppressed women. When women did not have the vote that was simply they way things were, when they got the vote, it proved the patriarchy did not exist. Even before the vote it was clear that the patriarchy did not exist as many women held public offices. Under a patriarchy this would not have been permitted. The feminist movement was conceived and propagated by a few malcontents wanting power through the use of lies and other women willing to believe them.

    Americans, including many foolish men, have been hoodwinked. Feminism was never about equal rights. Feminism is a war on men.

    Feminism has in modern times severed the bond between men and women, pitting them against one another. While young women report with increasing percentage that a successful marriage is one of the most important things in their lives, men have the opposite viewpoint.

    The form of equality sought by feminists is one that requires not only “liberation” from traditional roles but also from being female. “Being a woman is like being handicapped,” say feminists. The type of equality they seek declares that there is no difference between men and women and that they are totally interchangeable. This is a recipe for misery. Men and women have never been, aren’t now, and never will be interchangeable.

    “The modern notion of equality doesn’t raise women’s status. It lowers it by cheapening women’s value to men.”

    Many women over the past few years have been asking where all the good men have gone. The answer is that for decades women have been telling men that they can do everything for themselves and men have heard the message “We don’t need you” very clearly.

    Gender equality is not about equality. It is about creating a new world order. It is about the denial of human nature, it is about making the sexes interchangeable.

    Before all this shit about the sexual revolution traditional gender roles were viewed as equally valuable. In fact, it could be argued that women were superior to men. Keep in mind the incident with the Titanic, you know, women and children first and all. Keep in mind how men were expected to stand when a woman entered the room.

    American men were never holding women down in mass force. They were respectful and in awe of women.

    The feminists were wrong, the 1950’s were not a miserable time for women. For every one dissatisfied female, there were a hundred satisfied women. The nuclear family worked very well for a very long time. Feminists place no value on motherhood. Money and power, they exclaim, is how success is defined.

    I personally find it disgusting that some men have fallen for the feminist rhetoric and have begun supporting this movement which ultimately declares his obsolescence. I have even seen shirts printed for little girls that say “Daddy’s Little Feminist”, worn in ignorance, as it ultimately declares contempt for the father it supposedly salutes.

    Ultimately, here’s the truth: A woman can live alone, can be just fine without a man. The reverse is true also, a man can live alone, can be fine without a woman. Yet, it is better when a man is with a woman, and a woman is with a man.

    The above facts is why I am now not just wearing the label atheist. I am now “atheist/anti-feminist” and look upon feminism as either a disease, or surely as an enemy, not just of men, but of humanity. And it surely is. Many women are innocent pawns I fully believe and are not aware of the ramifications of what they have signed up for.

     

  • Hey, Did You Sign Up For This? … March 17, 2014

    drug use
    drug·gie also drug·gy (drŭg′ē)

    n. pl. drug·gies Slang

    One that takes or is addicted to drugs

    When you decided that the definition of atheist described your belief system did you think that you were going to be rubbing elbows with druggies? Was there any idea in your mind that the groups you might frequent would have individuals in it that thought drug use was perfectly okay, no matter the setting? Did you even consider that becoming an atheist would require such drastic alterations in moral perception? druggie 2

    Open-mindedness is one thing. Throwing everything to the wind is another. The personal rights or beliefs of another must be granted license, but does that mean you have to tolerate anything more than their right to destroy their own bodies with drugs? Do you have to watch as these people day by day deteriorate into ever lower levels of physical and mental condition?

    People have the right to wreck their bodies. They have had this right since time immemorial. Alcohol, tobacco,  both have been used for centuries for self-destruction. Other drugs, illegal now, and even more deleterious, have also been in use for centuries.  People are going to find and use these destructive substances regardless of their legality.

    People have the right to wreck their bodies. I grant that. I, however, am not required to care. If someone will not listen to reason, will not accept the facts, then I say let them burn themselves up. If you cannot watch as they descend, look away, it’s hard, I know, but what else is there other than to wreck your own life trying to lift up someone who doesn’t want to be lifted. If it is someone close to you it will be extremely hard to let go. Be advised though, if they do not want to be helped out of their miserable existence, if they actually think their life is better as a result of drug use, your life may be forfeited in a fruitless effort.

    All drugs, including alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine have potential to do harm. Some are more harmful than others. Some can be safely used in moderation. Some will do irreparable damage even in moderation.

    I use two, alcohol and caffeine. I use both in great moderation. I consider any other drugs harmful even in moderation. No, I do not want to argue that point.

  • Feminism and Feminists… What is it or They Good For? …. Nothing! ……March 9, 2014.

    Feminism was predicated on two lies. One lie is that there was a patriarchy, a male dominated hierarchy determined to oppress women. Two, that any man actively oppressed women. Women held public office even before they had the vote. A patriarchy would not have allowed that. Women gained the vote. A patriarchy would not have allowed that. Women were never oppressed. In those days that is simply the way things were. Men were not oppressive, there was no patriarchy, or there would be no woman in office or voting, even today.

    Feminism, as many of its founding women knew, was never about equality. It was always about supremacy. If the movement was about equality it would have disbanded long ago and harmony would reign everywhere.

    With the enactment of the “Gender Equality Act” the pendulum has now swung the other way. Women have the advantage and are making use of it to program the next generations. They are striving for total dominance.

    Many young women who join the movement think it is about equality, and have been lied to about conditions that prevail in society, just to that effect. Poor misguided and naïve, these women do not suspect the true nature of the movement they have signed on to. Most women who have been part of the movement know its true goals but are careful not to reveal the truth. Some feminists, like in any movement, do not possess the intellect to keep quiet and boast the truth to all. Feminists like:

    “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart

    “Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.” — Germaine Greer.

    “…that you don’t have to settle, you don’t have to fiddle with a man to have that child.” Jennifer Aniston.

    “Women may not find this surprising, but one of the most persistent and frustrating problems in evolutionary biology is the male. Specifically… why doesn’t he just go away” – Natalie Angier, author and journalist.

    “Now that women don’t need men to reproduce and refinance, the question is, will we keep you around? And the answer is, ‘You know, we need you in the way we need ice cream – you’ll be more ornamental.” – Mareen Dowd.

    “We are standing at a moment in time when the role of gender is shifting seismically. At this moment an argument can be made for two separate narrative threads – the first is the retreat of men as this becomes a woman’s world.” – Lisa Belkin.

    “The bad news for Dad is that despite common perception, there’s nothing objectively essential about his contribution.” – Pamela Paul.

    There never has been a war on women. There is however, very apparently, a war on men. Feminism is a war on men.

    I no longer think of feminists as being women. They even distain the thought that they are women. Being a woman, say feminists, is like being handicapped. I love women, especially my wife of nearly 34 years. I hate feminists, especially those who actually know what their movement stands for. I feel sorry for those “feminists” who haven’t a clue and are being led down the path, by the nose, to a life of misery.