Recent Blogs Posts

As someone might guess, we are in a gender war.
We didn't declared it, but we are in it. And this is the strangest war of history, because both genders are put against each others by the same actor, the feminism.
When communication fails and negotiation does not take place, conflict is then inevitable. That's the reason ambassadors are for, to negotiate conflicting interests by harmonizing different cultures and languages. And women and men are so beautifully different.

I feel the need to share with you few of my thoughts, on why we have issues in reneweing a social pact between the genders, why feminism is carrying men into the belief that women are betraying the current social pact and why women do not get it.

There are several components that contribute to this "great betrayal", but one stands above the others. It is the twisting of the language and in particular the improper handling of the most abused and yet unknown word, the noun "right".


THE RIGHT
People have a common belief that a right is something inherently "good". But this is not true.
This belief has also partially to deal with "linguistic" patterns (in many languages, such as English, the same word is used as an adjective to describe something which is "fair" or as oppostite to "wrong"), but the real reason we tend to nurture this "optimistic assumption" that once a right is "conquered" we get to better social conditions, comes from our habit to use this word as a description of collective interests.
When a group owns a right, all the individuals belonging to that group have the some benefits, at the same extent. Unfortunately we tend to drop the awareness that a "right" has inherently a price to be paid; if that price is not fairly shared among the group members, then this price must be paid by another social group (can be a race, an ethnic group, a country, and of course also a gender).

Indeed a "right" is simply the claim of an entitlement, by either an individual or a group, to a property, to a resource to the fulfillment of specific needs. Nothing more nothing less.

When someone states "it's my right" the meaning is "this resource is mine". And since in nature resources are limited, a right implies a conflict, ever, no exception.

So when someone claims a rights, is he/she/it prone to give something in exchange? Rarely, unless a negotiation is started.

The reason of this digression on the "right" will come clearer in next posts when I will address some practical examples of laws, norms, and why we have a gender conflict simply because we didn't communicated properly or because negotiation did not happen at all or the negotiation treaty has been thrown in the bin.

Before leaving, a basic principle:

"when someone claims a right, ever, and I mean ever, do ask who are the stakeholders; who gains, who pays" .
Do not be fooled by fairness, when someone claims a rights is not asking, that someone is pretending it, and soon or later will try to enforce it with violence. So be bold, ask it, explicitly and wihtout hesitation. It is your own "right" that is under threat.

http://thefemitheist.blogspot.it/2012/04/allow-me-to-introduce-myself.html

All Men Should Be Castrated? - International "Castration Day"

Some Feminists have considered this as an option. It is highly controversial.


Allow me to introduce myself...


My name is Krista, otherwise known as "The Femitheist". I am a female, a feminist, and someone who believes strongly in True Equality.


Now, I will begin explaining this entry before I post the actual article... for your discussion, of course.


Women MUST and WILL have equality, and this is the ONLY way to achieve TRUE equality. The testicles of all males, which produce the majority of their testosterone, are the primary cause of their violent behavior. The testicles also attribute greatly to many of the health problems men experience later in life (such as prostate cancer and, of course, testicular cancer).


~:The Solution... International Castration Day.:~


It is my belief (which I consider factual based on my research) that all men SHOULD be castrated. Not only for their own safety, but for the safety of all innocent women and children.


And, to achieve this...


The entire world should have an international holiday known as: "Castration Day"


Males of all ages will be brought to the public squares of their cities nude, to stand together in a circle, as they await castration by a woman known as "The Castrator", who will be a woman chosen from the public much like a juror.


Girls of all ages will attend, lining the streets to cheer and applaud the males as they join the rest of civilized society.


It will be a free vacation for any working woman. And, young girls will be able to leave school to attend this glorious ceremony.


The males will then have one hour to get to know their Castrator. Their female "spouse" will also be able to choose whether or not they would like to milk the male in order to retain a sperm sample.


If the male is too young for a "spouse", their mother or closest female relative will decide.


After this, the men will be given anesthetics. They will be placed on a table, where their Castrator will then slice open their ball-sack, remove their testicles, and the excess skin, stitch them up and clean them up.


They will be given thirty minutes to rest after the procedure.


Once the males have all been castrated, they will be grouped together again for one last look before walking nude back to their homes.


The women will then return to their jobs, schools, et cetera, and rejoice in the completion of yet another successful ceremony.


Any man who tries to evade this holiday, "Castration Day", should be murdered wherever they
are found (treated as a criminal, as it will be a crime not to attend). Or, forced to attend.
Regardless of age.


Any woman who disagrees should be provided therapy in order to free her from misogynistic indoctrination.


This holiday should replace the day known currently as "Father's Day".


If this practice were adopted officially all across the world, all war, crime, and violence would end.


We would have a true Eutopia, where peace reigns, and men do only what they exist for...


Breed.


Labor.


SERVE.


Die.


Likewise, the change of their hormones would make them less aggressive, and thus less likely to rape. It would also provide them with better health throughout their life, as the testicles are a major cause of health issues in males as they age.


All will profit from this...



And, I believe this will come to be someday soon.


Thanks for your consideration!

Mumsnet :Promoting Hate, Bigotry and Bias..

How similar is this to the Jezebel logo ? Same sexist doctrinal mentality at work..

I did spend some time last year perusing the "Mumsnet" site and was sickened by the malice and male hate stated on that site. The automatic vitriolic responses to my comment, even though very rational and unassuming, were responded to in ways that were totally unacceptable and were a direct assault on the site's policies, but were ignored. It was akin to the same vitriol and venom expressed on the RadFem Hub, just as sick and just as obnoxious and abusive. That feminastie site is definitely due for a shakeup and it is time that those sexist, male bashing sites started applying their own policies of fairness instead of fomenting hate and ignoring the obvious male bashing diatribe those haters have always indulged in..

Mumsnet on Facebook..

Mumsnet Site..

DSC Development and Hosting
Client Story: Mumsnet

Fathers 4 Justice Stage Naked Mumsnet Protest in Marks & Spencer Oxford Street

Like Matt States "Not a good sight"..

Members of Fathers 4 Justice (F4J) staged a naked protest in the flagship London branch of Marks & Spencer at Marble Arch, Oxford Street.
Group founder Matt O'Connor was arrested during the weekend protest, which criticised the high street store for its advertising on parenting blog site Mumsnet.
Along with four other members of the group, O'Connor took off his clothes in the store to draw attention to what F4J claimed was Mumsnet's "anti-male agenda".
He claimed that the protest was just the start of a series of attacks on M&S in order to draw attention to the "naked truth" that Mumsnet "promotes gender hatred".
He told IB Times UK: "We discovered some horrific content on the Mumsnet forums, including calling men fascists and equating fathers with Ku Klux Klan members.

So it is understandable that the Fathers4Justice movement faced up to that site's sexism, hate and discrimination. In a letter addressed to the CEO of the Mumsnet site, the Fathers4Justice Campaign Manager explains precisely what those nasty members on that site get up to and needless to say it is precisely what I witnessed as well. The entire site has been overrun by male haters as this letter states..

Dear Justine,

The following is our response to your 10 point statement about Fathers4Justice and gender hatred on Mumsnet. We are disappointed that this dispute has escalated over the last week and that Mumsnet has chosen not to resolve this matter.

As soon as we were made aware of the offensive anti-male discrimination on the Mumsnet website, we brought this matter to your attention in the appropriate manner.

We asked you to remove the offending content and commit to a zero-tolerance policy on gender hatred. We also offered to write a piece for Mumsnet outlining what Fathers4Justice actually campaigns and stands for, rather than the misrepresentation of F4J often portrayed on Mumsnet as well as to highlight the fact that F4J is run by a woman.

Instead of responding in a respectful and professional manner, you made flippant and derisory comments about me (a mother of two), failed to respond to my emails and went online in an attempt to appease the very people who had written this content by making derogatory remarks about our campaign.

Further, you have unhelpfully and deliberately set out to misrepresent the facts in this case, casting Fathers4Justice as the villains, and Mumsnet as helpless victims, disingenuously claiming no knowledge of the offence committed. A case of gender stereotyping if ever there was one.

This is not the mature response we had hoped for from a respected CEO. It should hardly be a surprise then that given your antagonistic and belligerent response, the situation has escalated. Not because we wanted to engage in an online conflict with Mumsnet, but simply because you would not remove much of the content we complained of nor make a commitment to a policy of zero-tolerance on gender hatred.

This is a situation which could and should have

...

Awakening

Men come to the Men’s Rights Movement in different ways.

For some, it’s a clap of thunder over your house in the dead of night. You are jolted from deep sleep to full consciousness in a heartbeat.

Most of us come to the new reality by a slow process. If you will, jigsaw puzzles in the recesses of your mind.

Time and experiences slowly click a piece at a time into place until the puzzle is complete and you begin to see the undeniable fact of how men are perceived and treated in Western society.

In a dark corner of your mind exists an old black and white television, covered in dust on a shelf next to an old instruction manual for a CD player and a box labeled “Stuff to do later”.

The TV has been there for years. It’s on and nothing much is seen on the screen except snow and flits of images that pass. The sound is turned down because it’s just a low hiss of white noise. You ignore the TV, nothing of interest is on. The wire clothes hanger antenna isn’t picking up much.

Time goes by and life winds its course. Something happens to you at work or in your life that does not seem right. Perhaps you are out with some friends and see a man and woman arguing across the street. She knees him in the testicles and he drops to the ground in pain. All of you exclaim in unison “OOOoooooo” “Ouch!” Someone says: “What did he do to deserve that? The girls in your group giggle and point at the guy doubled over in pain.

There’s an image on the old black and white TV, you glance over at it then look away. A feeling that something is not right about the situation swirls around in your mind, kicking up a bit of dust. You notice the TV set is much closer than it was previously.

*Click* The puzzle has the first piece laid down.

Life continues and the trials and tribulations of your existence move slowly forward. Situations happen to you that have no logical explanation. Maybe your boss promoted a woman in your office to a senior position. The woman is out sick 5 days a month and you have had to pick up her slack for a couple years. The office has become almost all female due to the hiring preferences of your supervisor.

*Click*

The office flirt constantly makes sexual innuendo comments to you, she’s even described her favorite dildo she calls “Big Max”. Sick of this behavior, you report her to your boss. Your boss seems concerned but says you must be misunderstanding the situation. Your boss tells you to get a sense of humor. She’s abrupt and dismissive of your concerns. The complaint you addressed to your supervisor was dismissed as a shortcoming in your character.

*Click* *Click* *Click*

The black and white TV in your mind now has a clear picture and the volume has been turned up. The show called “Your Life” is on. The TV is much closer now. You watch the show for a time, feeling irritated and a bit frustrated. A thought traverses your mind: “Is it like this for other guys? Am I the only one seeing this stuff?”

Work begins to consume your life’s focus. Responsibility and determination are your mantra.

After a long work week a couple pints of beer are in order. Down at the pub there’s a game on and the early evening crowd is just starting to arrive.

A commercial for Demarche Jewelers comes on the television. A handsome couple sits down at a bistro table; the beautiful young woman is showing off her Diamond encrusted tennis bracelet to her obviously jealous girlfriends. A slovenly dressed man sits down next to his supermodel wife. He’s late and needs a shave badly. She looks at her cheap tennis bracelet with one small diamond and gets a look of disgust. She pulls out her pocket book and slaps her slovenly dressed husband across the face with it. The commercial ends with the phrase “Demarche jewelers, when only the best will do. Don’t be that guy”.

“What the hell??” you say out loud. Stasha, the barkeep notices. He walks over “Yah, dats bad stuff. Dem Joolaws use dem blood diamonds from Africa.” The point was missed by a few thousand miles.

*Click* *Click* *Click* * Click* The puzzle is taking shape.

Later on at home that night there is a strange feeling, not good, not right. The “Your Life” show is on but it’s different.

The black and white TV is gone!

There is a 25” color flat screen in its place. The volume is up and clear, the picture is bright and realistic looking. Events of the day and evening scroll by, the Jeweler commercial come up again.

In your mind you shout “What the Fuck!!” as you review the commercial. Agitated and irritated, you go off to bed.

*Click* *Click*

Weeks go by; months go by, perhaps a year or two. The 25” ...

As I previously stated, this blog will undergo some changes. One of the changes that I am glad to announce will my new Guest Author - Joanna T. who is currently stationed in Switzerland, originally from England..

I look forward to Joanna's input and hope it will be a long and fruitful arrangement..

Joanna's task will be to present the other side of the argument, so to speak, in her own words and in her own redolent style. We have both arrived at a point where the ongoing, irrational negativity that has been promoted by feminists and thereby feminism, has indeed marred and denigrated the relationship between males and females. It really needs to be toned down and harnessed rather than fomented and encouraged. We need to take the next step. It is up to us to garner the troops in our efforts of ensuring that feminism and feminists are rejected and exposed for the clearly demonstrated pariahs they really are. This effort is part of that program..

Feminists hate the idea of any members of the Mens Movement joining together with members of opposite sex and demonstrating that reason and affability reigns in the MM also show that we are not the women haters they claim us to be. It's rubbing salt into already festering wounds..

Regardless how you personally view it, it cannot continue or it should not escalate as we are both on this planet to make our lives the best we possibly can. The other issue is that feminism and it's hate doctrine is primarily designed to drive a wedge between the sexes and I really do not want to be seen or be doing anything to promote any long term plan that feminism has in that direction. This is primarily going directly against feminisms aims and plans, this is the next step..

Joanna's latest article has struck a cord with me as I have been promoting the MGTOW lifestyle ever since I and a few other lads started the MGTOW movement. The founders of MGTOW, Ragnar, Johan, Myself and Zen, to name a few, got together to work on this when there was no other alternative lifestyle or options for men to pursue. It was either, get married and have kids or be scorned for being a free loader. Society at that time had that mindset and if there is one single issue that feminists can claim they did for men, it was to generate our determination to demand that men should have different options to determine their own lives rather than going down the same path, generations before had done in automatic and robotic fashion. Women were being forced to change so it only made sense that men should be given different options as well..

Hence MGTOW was born and hence we have this article.

The effects of MGTOW on the opposite sex has never been revealed or explained as I for one was very interested to see if it had any effect at all apart from introducing the marriage strike. Not that that was the idea of it all to begin with but it was a minor consideration on my part..

SO I welcome Joanna T on board and I can guarantee that she is one of us. I will ask Joanna to tell her own story some time in the future, her own impression and thoughts on feminists and feminism..


MGTOW - good or bad for women?

Joanna T.
The Sanctuary.


There are three phrases that strike fear into the hearts of modern marriage-minded women.
'Marriage on the decline', 'MGTOW' (Men going their own way), 'Marriage strike'.

A woman's greatest fear is abandonment. Or worse, never to have been approached in the first place.
Feminism encourages women to hide this fear.
Some do it well.
But here-in lies the problem: a fear will always remain as a fear unless it is resolved.

A quirk of Nature results in the following observations:
A man does not need a woman. He is capable of being a solitary entity his whole life, and he won't care.
His work/passion/hobby is his primary focus.

A woman needs people around her. The most efficient way to increase the entourage who share her DNA is to team up with a man. So technically, a woman needs a man.

A man's greatest physical need is sexual fulfilment (according to Dr Kevin Lehman). A man's greatest social need is his freedom.
These two needs are in direct conflict with each other. Marriage (read: a woman) satisfies one at the expense of the other.
But in the old days, men often chose marriage and hoped for the best with the other need. Sometimes it worked out well.
Other times it did not.

Then feminism separated 'woman' from 'marriage'.

All of a sudden, a man could eat his cake and have it too. A win-win situation!
Being a logical being, he did.

A woman's natural reaction to MGTOW ...

IMPORTANT RELEASE FOR ALL MEN: PLEASE READ..



Here we have an explanation of what feminists, in this case radical feminists and the Gillard Government, have in mind for ALL AUSTRALIAN MEN and this is just an example of what is coming your way as well. This legislation is already in Place in Tasmania, AUSTRALIA and it will ensure that Men are jailed, without any opportunity to claim a fair trial, no opportunity to present any counter argument and will be taken to prison on any claim made by any female under any circumstances..

Fifty percent of all men in jail in Tasmania are there because of this draconian piece of legislation. They are served with a court order for one year to not go within 100 meters his own home or see his children and all his accounts, everything he owns will be confiscated and given to the person making the claim. No proof is necessary, no witnesses required, no doctors reports required, no evidence has to be submitted, only on the word of one individual will ensure this action to takes place..

This action will be enforced even when he is not guilty or if the female is the abuser. There is no comeback whatsoever. Even if the claimant retracted her accusation and informs the Police that she has lied, nothing will change..

This release identifies precisely how this new legislation is going to work and this will become LAW in AUSTRALIA within a very short period of time. Possibly over the next month or two if we do NOTHING. Ignore this at your own risk..

New Legislation Designed to Persecute Men and Deny his basic Human Rights.


If you are male and living in Australia, this is the probably the most important email you'll read this year.



This message is about the highly discriminatory National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Domestic Violence Against Women and Their Children, 2009-2021 (henceforth described as 'The Plan').


The Plan is long (200+ pages), so you might like to save it to your desktop and read it little by little, but it's essential that you do read it as it may affect your freedom. If you don't, you may well find yourself in jail one day - minus legal entry to your house, access to your children and any reputation you think you once had, all without doing a single thing wrong. Please share it with every other responsible men you know so they too will learn how their civil liberties are being dangerously undermined under the guise of reducing domestic violence against women.


The most important liberty that will be lost is the presumption of innocence (for men, not women) - one of the foundation stones of a civilised legal system. If the draconian legislation proposed by The Plan is passed through both Houses of Parliament and into Family Law, the legal system in Australia will no longer automatically protect men from false DV and rape accusations and the government will take control of the family. Adoption of The Plan will, essentially, legalise Apartheid and enforce it if necessary at the point of a gun.


Domestic violence and sexual assault are serious crimes, so any wise and just plan to properly identify and reduce them should be applauded. The Plan, however, is neither wise, just nor worthy of applause. It presumes women have no agency when under the influence of drugs or alcohol and that all men are violent offenders by default. Read the document and learn for yourself what could happen to both men and women if The Plan passes into law. Once you've read it, forward it to others with a copy of this message and get active. Write to your MP, raise awareness, talk to the press, raise some placards at your local shopping centre, take your protest to Canberra. Do whatever suits you, but please do something. If you do nothing, prepare to lose your civil liberties via the most draconian legislation since the anti-semitic Nazi Nuremberg Laws of 1935. Yes, it is that serious.


Here's a summary of what will happen if The Plan is endorsed by both Houses of Parliament:


1. The Australian Government will assume that women never lie about domestic violence or sexual assault, even when child custody is at stake and the temptation to lie is extreme.



2. The definitions of Domestic Violence will be broadened to include acts such as striking inanimate objects, making purchases without consulting a female partner, not listening to a female partner or even disciplining a dog. The same actions will not be considered DV if the actor is female (see item 3 below).


3. The legal redefinition of domestic violence will exclude male victims from that legal definition - i.e. men and boys who are assaulted by female relatives will not have legal rights as victims.


4. DV and Sexual assault cases will go to the front ...

Fraud in Australia’s plan to reduce violence against women..

The introduction of the "Violence against Women" programs has been something that feminists have dreamt up in order to introduce anti-male laws around the world. As usual, feminists and their enablers will use falsified information and any other method they can find in order to convince the law makers, if we can refer to them in that fashion, to change existing laws in order to discriminate against man and boy, while at the same time ensuring their own positions, paid for by taxpayers, are protected and guaranteed..
The hypocrisy that feminists have and continue to introduce is demonstrated once again by the author of this article. The researchers, professors and doctors are the radicals who produced the misandric material are the same women who attended the SCUM Manifesto Conference in Perth, Western Australia in 2011. Those same women who were scheming and planning about removing half of the earth's population, blowing up the Men's Sheds and throwing little male toddlers thru windows while they are closed should indicate their inhumane nature..
They are the "NEW" breed of fanatical feminists that control that hegemony and decide future policies and actions. They are also mostly lesbians, which does not come as any surprise considering their vitriol and malice towards all males..
Behind all this and included in their sullied actions and behaviour, we have the Gillard Government who have turned a blind eye to the recommendations these radicals want to introduce into parliament and make law. The Gillard Government demonstrates again what their intentions are for half of the Australian Population. More bigotry, discrimination and bias..

Fraud in Australia’s plan to reduce violence against women

The 2009 Australian project a ‘Time for Action: The National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, 2009-2021′, was approved for implementation by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). The Plan, which is split into several parts, puts forth recommendations for new legislation, changes to judicial processes, requests for funding and ideas for domestic programs targeted at reducing domestic and sexual violence against women. The advisory council has some powers to implement programs through the Office of Women among other agencies, but much of what the government funded program calls for requires approval by Parliament.
The entire premise of the National Plan was underpinned by the belief in this statement:“While a small proportion of men are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, the majority of people who experience this kind of violence are women in a home, at the hands of men they know.”[27-pg1] But a quick examination of the statistics and data shows a much different picture to the rather sweeping indictment of Australian men the National Council paints.

Indeed, The Plan never addresses the topic of violence that women commit towards men or towards children, nor does it accurately state the facts as they are in Australia.
The Data and Statistics
The National Council’s plan is put forth as a direct response to several academic papers and various activists around Australia, which purport data and statistics that claim to show an epidemic of men’s violence against women. However, the National Council readily admits its data on actual incidences of domestic violence and sexual assault is poor, sporadic and in some cases inaccurate. Nevertheless, the council makes most of their recommendations based on the conclusions of several academic papers and studies, and rarely address any comprehensive analysis of their own. Indeed, The Plan never addresses the topic of violence that women commit towards men or towards children, nor does it accurately state the facts as they are in Australia.

“Data relating to violence against women and their children in Australia is poor. Data on services sought by, and provided to, victims is not readily available, and the way in which information is reported is generally inconsistent and does not allow for a comprehensive understanding of violence against women. Variations in data estimates across Australia are affected by differences in what is captured, counted and reported across States and Territories.
There are also personal and institutional barriers in decision making within and across systems that reduce the extent to which sexual assault and domestic and family violence is disclosed and reported. This affects the capacity of data to accurately reflect the real numbers of women and children who

...

Australia launches “The Plan” and the end to civil rights..



When one reads something like this, you could be excused for thinking that it's not really true. How can this be in this day and age when everyone is so enlightened. Human rights is instituted, surely, in law. The bad old days of fascism and witch hunts have been relegated to history as a joke. We now have legal rights as human beings to go about our own business and to live a life free of tyranny and injustice, surely..

Apparently not. The forces at work in Canberra are not a force of consisting of a group of people who are looking to enhance our lives but to destroy it. Radical feminists have already demonstrated what their end goal is and now we are seeing those same people that we exposed on the RADFEM HUB, who are directly linked to the Australian Government, introducing laws that will not only create disharmony but bias and hate. The reality of all these recommended laws are indeed mind boggling and we have only just starting to poke and prod it's reality..

Those radical feminists will, if they are not stopped, introduce laws that are so archaic and debilitating as to make George Orwell's book "1984" appear be a normal everyday event. This is not tyranny as we have witnessed in the past, it's apartheid between the sexes in the very worst degree..

Wait until the facts are released as at the moment, if we were to introduce them, it would just be too much to take in. This is only the beginning..

January 6, 2012Paul Elam<small style="color: rgb(56, 56, 56); font: normal normal bold 0.71em/normal Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; text-transform: uppercase; ">FEMINIST GOVERNANCE</small>

Australia launches “The Plan” and the end to civil rights

As chief cook and bottle washer at AVfM I have been in the dubious position of gathering information from across the globe on the negative impact of feminist governance.
Last year we addressed matters like the “Dear Colleague” letter, which effectively ended the right of due process for college men accused of any sort of sexual misconduct. We covered the unthinkable events in India, where men have been assaulted and even thrown from moving trains for daring to set foot in train car reserved for women; where politicians have suggested bounties be paid to women who beat their husbands in public. We exposed circumstances in Sweden, where school children are being indoctrinated into the virulent and hateful ideology of Valerie Solanas. Just last night we did a radio show as a follow up to Robert O’Hara’s investigative piece on the plan to coerce 28,000,000 African men into being circumcised. And of course there is the ongoing exposure of ideologues at Radfem Hub, a group of well-placed feminists who glorify murder, child abuse, eugenics and infanticide.
It appears now that 2011 was just a warm up for 2012.
Over the next several days you will find a series of articles on this website regarding an assault on human rights that will sweep the Australian continent. The scope of aplanned campaign by the Australian government (The National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, 2009-2021) is so far reaching that presenting it without overwhelming readers has been a significant challenge for myself, Kyle Lovett and John the Other. The sheer volume of the content, as well as the staggering loss of civil rights that Australian men are about to suffer is formidable.
The amount and complexity of the material to come is sufficient that I felt it warranted to prepare you with this article, which in essence is written solely for the purpose of bracing you for the onslaught of information; to, if I may request your indulgence, tell you what you are about to be told.
These machinations have now reached the stage of action, and are about to be implemented. They involve, but are by no means limited, to the following:

• The systemic enabling and promotion of child abuse by mothers and other women.
• The Australian government suppression of research that implicates women as child abusers.
• The legal redefinition of domestic violence to include acts such as making purchases without consulting your wife, not listening to your wife or even disciplining your dog.
• The legal redefinition of domestic violence to exclude male victims from that legal definition.
• Arresting and holding men in prison, without bail, on the accusation alone of domestic violence.
• Summarily evicting men from their homes while forcing them to maintain financial responsibility for those homes on nothing more than an accusation from their wives or girlfriends.
• Shifting the burden of proof on domestic violence from the

...

The Zeitgeist of Radical Feminists in AUS. Law

December 30, 2011
Kyle Lovett <small style="color: rgb(56, 56, 56); font: normal normal bold 0.71em/normal Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; text-transform: uppercase; ">FEMINISM, FEMINIST GOVERNANCE</small>

A path to Australian apartheid

(The first part of this series on Australia can be found here)
Tanya Plibersek, Australian Minister for Housing and Minister for the Status of Women in the Rudd Labor Government, wrote in 2002;

“At the weekend, the National Party voted against special measures to increase their number of women parliamentarians. The ALP and the Liberals, in contrast, want more women, but can’t agree on the best way to get them. This should be good news for the feminists who fought to make it happen, yet some – like the former federal MP Susan Ryan – ask whether it was worth it. After all, we haven’t defeated patriarchy. Yet.”[1]

Seven years later, Plibersek played a critical role in championing Australia’s new ‘National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children’. Plibersek, along side Jenny Macklin, Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, put together a consortium of academics and domestic violence experts, to spearhead a team which would go on create the national report that became official policy. Since the early 2000′s, Plibersek never made it secret that she strongly supports feminist and even some radical feminist ideals. Indeed, in 2005, when Sheila Jeffreys came to Sydney to make a speech, it was Plibersek that introduced her with warm welcoming remarks.[2]

In April 1999, Plibersek gave an interview to Peter Lewis, during which she spoke about these ties of the Labor Party to the feminist community:

“I think that our historical relationships with groups outside the Labor Party like the peace movement, the anti-nuclear movement, the environment, the feminist movement. Our links with community feminist organisations have been about promoting grassroots activism around sexual assault services, domestic violence services; that sort of activism within the community and collective responsibility..”

She went on to weigh in about giving help to families with disabled children, but also clarified that she felt families are strictly women and children, and that any of their responsibilities should become the state’s responsibility;

“But it is also fair to say that the State owes a responsibility to those kids and their parents. We don’t want to return to a situation of voluntarism where individual parents may not have the skills or the patience or the time or the financial ability to look after their children in the ways that would benefit them the most. And I don’t know if it’s an ideal situation to necessarily throw the responsibility back on them. I don’t want to go back to a situation where families — and that means women — are being told its their responsibility all over again.”[3]

Plibersek’s special hand-picked legal advisor to the council was former Tasmanian Attorney-General Judith Jackson. Jackson, who labels herself as a “committed feminist,” has had a career filled with controversy. In the 2004 Tasmania Family Violence Act, [7] she was roundly criticized for her insistence that people accused of domestic violence not be granted bail before trial unless a series of nearly impossible steps were taken by the judge. When Jackson was criticized for attempting to bypass the Justice system, and for violating the human rights of men, she lashed out at her critics;

“How can anybody say that somebody should be let out on bail, so they can go back and re-offend and commit a crime again, and that’s what you’re saying and I find that disgusting.”[4]

But despite the fact that the data used as justification for the bill was based on very poor research, which according to many human rights advocates and several of her critics, never examined how often men were battered in similar circumstances, the bill was passed into law. The ramifications of the law went on to see hundreds of Tasmanian men spending weeks, many times months in prison before trial, for being accused of crimes like ‘economic’ or ‘emotional’ abuse. Ms. Jackson, when confronted about what the law was doing in practice, appeared quite amused and replied:

“We do have some of the best legislation in the world for protecting women and children,”[5]

The reality of the ‘National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children’ is that it was promoted and shepherded through Australian government by Plibersek, a woman that admittedly was heavily biased towards a hardline feminist perspective ...

Feminism's Inheritance and Your Future..

Deluded Children..

I was somewhat flummoxed by a response from a comment on one of the men's forums, commenter was a female. She was of the opinion that the release of the 160Mb of information released by Agent Orange was, well, you know, not that bad..
To be honest, my first response was a potential conniption, but then I realised that I had been party to the original release by Agent Orange and that I had spent quite a few hours, days actually, reading what the public would and should not ever be exposed to . That additional information, if released would make it appear that it was managed contrivance of information and nobody would even accept the fact that (gosh), a group of women could congregate, plan and scheme the destruction of an entire sex. How would that be possible, as all women are are such cuddly, caring individuals, so we have been told, and would never ever harm a single hair on anyone's head..

Lies ofcourse, well rehearsed, manipulated propaganda and presented to the public, but still lies fed to the unwary..

They have obviously not read about that female charged with genocide this year (Google it) or all those women who have murdered their children and spouses, especially one that murdered five at one go. Did you read about that female who filleted her husband and fed him to the kids as a casserole (Go ahead, Google it, I don't make this stuff up). Female murderous intent and actions have been hidden from a gullible public, intentionally, who even when faced with the facts, just refuse to believe any of it. The main stream media has also pandered in that direction as they hide the wrongdoing by women to the back pages or tone down the seriousness of their crime and try to justify it or blame their partners as feminists are prone to do..

Sadly, anyone who prescribed to that preferred utopian opinion would require similar treatment to those lunatics, who wrote, laughed and planned all those nasty male hating options. Bear in mind too that radical feminists are the driving force behind the feminist hegemony. They are the policy makers and if you would like an example on how nasty, biased and sadistic it can get, have a look at Sweden and it's radical feminist introduced laws. To be sickened by the attitudes and articles that radical feminists have presented would indicate that there is still some humanity instilled in your cerebral cortex. But you will not find an ounce of that emotion or humanity in any radical feminist. Nothing exists except hatred, a toxicity that drives them to the edge of insanity in order to extract revenge for some imaginary or legitimate wrongs of the past. It is their only point of reference.

Those psychotic luminaries filter their wanton malice and hate down the feminist chain where their writings, articles and loathing are read by students in Women Studies/Gender Studies classes and groups. Their hate, loathing and malice filters through the feminist network to such a degree that everyone partaking in these subjects will be educated by that mentality. Have a look at the subjects and titles of the books recommended by Women's/Gender studies and ask yourself who have penned those books, who the authors are, and then check on the web for an explanation or resume of the author. I can guarantee that most of those books listed were written by radical feminists..

Those authors are not some benign thought provoking types, no, they are in it to ensure that all man and boy are maligned, denigrated and humiliated, promoted to third class citizenry, they are there to promote a much worse scenario which is why the "fun" delusional feminists have been caught out and do not argue any of the exposed radicalism as they are well aware of the fact that it is precisely what those radicals are stating and our claim is 100% correct, they cannot argue against any of it as the evidence is there for all to see..

Radfem Hub and other major sources for feminist news and commentary have remained curiously silent on the matter. There is no mention of the release either on Radfem, Jezebel, Feministe or Feministing as might have been expected considering the comments on Reddit. It is assumed, however that much attention has been paid amongst the feminist community to this story and its developments.(AVfM)

It makes a mockery of feminist's useful idiots like Marcotte and Valenti who wallow in the minutiae of feminism when in reality they are just skirting it's real intentions. They are both either too stupid to realise that or are smart enough to avoid any mention of it. I am going with "too ...