Thread: Ebook: A Men's Liberation Guide to Women by Sam Fryman

Quote from Male-Rights-Network

Scribd

I have not read this book, but the chapter list looks very promising.

It includes:

What is this "liberation from women" nonsense all about
Identity theft - the Stealing of the Male Identity
The Sexual Enslavement of Men Masquerading as Freedom
Hypnosis and Irrationality - the Secret of Female Power
The Fall and Rise of the Sexually Empowered Woman
How The Feminist Woman Damages Her Male Children
Sex in the City - Making Boys and Men into Pavlov's Dog
Givus a job - Men's Battle for dignity of labour in the feminist society
Commericial Sperm Donation and Other Crimes Against Men

This is the kind of high-level masculinist thought I think we as MRAs and as a movement should aspire towards.

Analysis and solutions all firmly grounded in reality, not idle hope or inadequate explanations based on "Marxism", "equality" etc.

Some of the PDFs linked to on Scribd are also well worth a look.

[ MRN Blog ]

what happened to MRN?

Thanks, I read a bit and really liked it. I may buy a copy and have my son read it.

It is interesting that he chose Sparticus as a role model.

I lived in Hollywood for 20 years and knew one of the writers of Xena the warrior princess. I questioned her on how emasculating the show was. The writer became irrate and would not discuss it further, as if I was on to something.

It was clear to me this was part of game plan and that she and the other creators of Xena were intentionally emasculating men.

It's also interesting that Xena became a lesbian cult classic.

I am a Catholic and very proud that the Pope has come out as anti-feminist. I think the writer of this book is onto something.

This thread mentions the works of SAM FRYMAN the author of "A Mens Liberation Guide to
Women" and other books. Posting here maybe my only hope

I'm desperately trying to get this collection of books! I've lost mine (my computer crashed) and I really want to get it
back. They're not available ANYWHERE online.

I know it's an extraordinary request but I'm really hoping someone has this collection.

Sorry, can't help with that.

Many of the people on here are suggesting that their identity as a man is completely reliant on women's identity and portrayl in society. This is why man's identity is flawed and fragile, it is too dependent on others' identity. Men say, 'if women act like that or this I won't feel like a man', 'if women are too sexual or strong or independent then I won't feel like a man'.

Women have the ability to be all those things but man has prevented women from fufilling their potential throughout historiy out of fear that this would destroy their male identity.

Female identity can not be destroyed easily as it is inherint in the nature of a woman's body and her ability to give birth. Men fear women's becoming more like the traditional man because they know they can never achive the things a woman can.

Woman ca do all the things men can do plus bring new life into this world which is what gives them their fundamental identity.

The only aspect of a man that women do not have is more strength and unfortunatly men have used this thoughout history to opress women as a means of maintaining their own masculine identity.

You sound like an old feminist from soc.men days whose name escapes me right this moment... she used to gloat in capitals "Women can do anything a man can do PLUS gestate..." as if that somehow gave them superiority over men. She also used to spout that 'men' as a whole abused & oppressed women as a whole without a shred of evidence to back it up, just like you have.

Did you used to frequent soc.men?

Quote from Unregistered

The only aspect of a man that women do not have is more strength and unfortunatly men have used this thoughout history to opress women as a means of maintaining their own masculine identity.

Wrong again, at least read your history before sounding off like an ignorant fool.

Quote from Unregistered

Many of the people on here are suggesting that their identity as a man is completely reliant on women's identity and portrayl in society. This is why man's identity is flawed and fragile, it is too dependent on others' identity. Men say, 'if women act like that or this I won't feel like a man', 'if women are too sexual or strong or independent then I won't feel like a man'.

Women have the ability to be all those things but man has prevented women from fufilling their potential throughout historiy out of fear that this would destroy their male identity.

Female identity can not be destroyed easily as it is inherint in the nature of a woman's body and her ability to give birth. Men fear women's becoming more like the traditional man because they know they can never achive the things a woman can.

Woman ca do all the things men can do plus bring new life into this world which is what gives them their fundamental identity.

The only aspect of a man that women do not have is more strength and unfortunatly men have used this thoughout history to opress women as a means of maintaining their own masculine identity.

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA! Lordy.. (wipes tears from eyes) That was some funny assed shit right there!

TMOTS

If women have been so superior throughout history, how come the inferior male has managed to oppress them so completely and for so long using only brute strength? Why didn't women simply out-think and out-manoeuvre these lumpen brutes? They certainly had enough time to work out how to do so.

And if brute strength has been the only identifying quality of masculinity, and it has so completely dominated human life both male and female, then where did our amazing advanced civilisations, replete with miraculous technologies, come from?

Women obviously didn't build them - they were too busy being oppressed and having their superior knowledge and skills crushed and wasted by the ignorant male yahoos who surrounded them. Men obviously didn't build them, since the male population consisted of an army of muscle-bound neanderthal grunts, sloping around with their knuckles dragging in the dust, obsessed with preserving their fragile and vulnerable identities, and with their puny brains overwhelmed with fear of those frightening women escaping fom their clutches and proving their superiority by destroying them.

That seems to leave these choices:

1) the animals created our civilisations for us.
2) our civilisations just sprang up ready-made out of thin air.
3) those good old aliens swanned along in their UFOs and did it all for us before disappearing. And all without any of us noticing.
4) there is no civilisation at all, we are all just sitting in swamps or deserts starving to death and our demented brains are just imagining it all.

I would be very interested in hearing which of these four possibilities our honoured guest believes is the correct one. Or perhaps he/she has some alternative I have not thought of?

I wait to be enlightened by the almighty wisdom that has descended onto this site and now sits in our midst.

Quote from paul parmenter

If women have been so superior throughout history, how come the inferior male has managed to oppress them so completely and for so long using only brute strength? Why didn't women simply out-think and out-manoeuvre these lumpen brutes? They certainly had enough time to work out how to do so.

And if brute strength has been the only identifying quality of masculinity, and it has so completely dominated human life both male and female, then where did our amazing advanced civilisations, replete with miraculous technologies, come from?

Women obviously didn't build them - they were too busy being oppressed and having their superior knowledge and skills crushed and wasted by the ignorant male yahoos who surrounded them. Men obviously didn't build them, since the male population consisted of an army of muscle-bound neanderthal grunts, sloping around with their knuckles dragging in the dust, obsessed with preserving their fragile and vulnerable identities, and with their puny brains overwhelmed with fear of those frightening women escaping fom their clutches and proving their superiority by destroying them.

That seems to leave these choices:

1) the animals created our civilisations for us.
2) our civilisations just sprang up ready-made out of thin air.
3) those good old aliens swanned along in their UFOs and did it all for us before disappearing. And all without any of us noticing.
4) there is no civilisation at all, we are all just sitting in swamps or deserts starving to death and our demented brains are just imagining it all.

I would be very interested in hearing which of these four possibilities our honoured guest believes is the correct one. Or perhaps he/she has some alternative I have not thought of?

I wait to be enlightened by the almighty wisdom that has descended onto this site and now sits in our midst.

Careful, you're using LOGIC; and whenever logic comes through the door, feminism goes out the window....

Amazon.com: The Manipulated Man (9780953096428): Esther Vilar: Books
A brilliant eye-opener, December 19, 2002
By Peter Kubiak

This review is from: The manipulated man (Hardcover)

This is one of the most enlightening books I've ever read. Esther Vilar is one of the few women who dare to criticize their own sex and the way feminism is going. But she makes clear that she *does* want women to be emancipated - as long as they are willing to accept responsibilities the way men do. Vilar is able to explain why discrimination against women in the professional world is women's own fault: the pay cheque of a man who is prepared to support his wife for years is more valuable and necessary than the pay cheque of a woman who won't support a man and who insists on a money-earning husband.

Quote: "The 'woman with a family' - the woman who supports a healthy man and his children all her life - is practically unknown in the professional world. Who should be held responsible for this situation: employer or woman?" (to be found in the last but one chapter, the one about Women's Lib)

It may seem impolite when I say it, but it's a plain fact that most women only marry men who want to earn money and that women - at the same time - have the nerve to say that no man wants to stay at home anyway...

It's also a plain fact that Esther Vilar has been the victim of censorship (however "unofficial" censorship it may be): in the most important Western country, the U.S., The Manipulated Man has been removed from many libraries, most of her other work is not even sold in English.

TV stations, magazines and papers in most Western countries constantly ignore everything Esther Vilar writes and says. Coincidence? Besides, there are many people on the Internet who claim that they've read her books, but deliberately tell lies about her books: e.g. they say that Vilar is old-fashioned and that she wants women to stay at home - a simple lie. Some anonymous people even insult Vilar's fans, using offensive words - the main characteristic of those haters is their unability to discuss the real *contents* of Vilar's books and to give reasons for their opinions...

...and so I really wonder how much time will pass until everyone finally realizes that *both* men and women can benefit from this book. I like the text on the back of the cover which says: "[...] But Vilar's intention is not misogynous. She maintains that only if men and women look at their place in society with honesty, will there be any hope for change."

Woman ca do all the things men can do plus bring new life into this world which is what gives them their fundamental identity.

Women cannot magically impregnate themselves; men and women create life together, but this is just the sort of thing female chauvanists like to overlook (show me an example of virgin birth please and I'll take your silly twaddle seriously) but on that note women clearly cannot do 'all the things men can,' as evidenced by the many achievements held by men which women have yet to equal.

The only aspect of a man that women do not have is more strength and unfortunatly men have used this thoughout history to opress women as a means of maintaining their own masculine identity.

Historically men have actually had that greater strength yoked to the purposes of the elite of any given period. Men's greater capacity for labor makes them more exploitable than are women hence they are more exploited in all but the sexual arena. Of course women will say somehow sexual exploitation is the highest form, but it is clearly not. I would rather be a sex-slave than a conscript.

Any honest woman would agree unless she is simply too sheltered from the cruelties of the male experience to appreciate how physical exploitation is a thousand times more demeaning and destructive than is sexual.

The Manipulated Man by Esther Vilar
ebook: request download ticket | ifile.it (.pdf, 0.3MB)

I posted the ebook version of Vilar's book above. Here's an extract:

THE MASK OF FEMININITY - The Manipulated Man by Esther Vilar

There is virtually no difference between an unmade-up, bald, naked, woman and an
unmade-up, bald, naked man, except their reproductive organs. Any other difference
between them is artificially produced. A man becomes a man because he develops

his intelligence and, through its development, his productivity. His appearance

changes very little. A woman becomes a woman by means of gradual stultification
and by deliberately transforming her external appearance, and this differentiation
between the sexes is prompted exclusively by woman.
As we have said, a man is considered masculine only after a series of manipulations
on the part of women. A woman, on the other hand, is the author of her own
transformation and produces femininity by means of cosmetics, hair style, and
clothes. This femininity, synthetic in origin, consists of two different components:
emphasis on secondary sexual characteristics and distancing herself by means of
masks. Woman makes use of various types of masks in order to make the difference
between herself and a given man as conspicuous as possible.
The first component serves to make her desirable to man. the second to make her
mysterious to him. She herself thus creates the equivocal, unknown `opposite sex,'
making it easier for him to accept his enslavement. Thanks to the wide range of
possible transformations each woman can offer a man - and a `real' woman varies
her looks just a little every day - she keeps him in a state of constant bewilderment
While he is still trying to find yesterday's woman in today's, she gains time to achieve
her own ends. She will maneuvre the man into an untenable position, all the time
skilfully distracting his attention from the stench of a rotting mind beneath the
pleasing mask.
Woman regards her natural self merely as the raw material of a woman. Not the raw
material but the end result has to be judged. Unmade-up, without curls and bracelets
and necklaces, women are not yet really present. This explains why they do not mind
running around in curlers or with cold cream on their faces. It is not `they' at that
stage - they are still occupied with the process of becoming `them.' They succeed
with this sort of make-believe all the more easily because they are not hampered by
any kind of intelligence.
No effort is so great that woman will not make it in order to achieve this
metamorphosis. No make-up can cost too much, or take too long to put on, when it is
a question of the final product which will distinguish them so markedly from men. By
rubbing cream into their skins they make them smoother than men's. Their hair is
curled or worn long for the same reason. They do not put black mascara around their
eyes for the sake of beauty - it is to make their eyes differ from male eyes - strange,

mysterious, disturbing.

__________________________________________________ __________________

I suppose we shall assess the writings of Esther Vilar in the same way we assess any piece of writing: critically and with an open mind. Her insights into certain aspects of female psychological character are worth considering. How seriously we take her writing is down to how highly we hold her in esteem.The same applies for any piece of writing for that matter. The same applies for the writings of Nietzsche, for example, from whom the following are quotations:

Man created woman—out of what? Out of a rib of his god—of his "ideal." - Nietzsche

For only he who is man enough will

redeem the woman in woman. - Nietzsche

The first sums up the "mask" that Vilar is trying to describe. It's reflection of man's ideal.

The second quotation sums up the real test of manhood, that is, to take it upon yourself to bring the best out in your woman.

__________________________________________________ _______________________

The following is an extract from Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra about the the male-female dynamic. The final word of which is the infamous remark about the whip! I personally admire Nietzsche greatly. His writings are full of gems. The following quote is a thousand times more astute than anything ever written about the male-female dynamic. In two lines it's worth a thousand times the works of Esthar Vilar:

Whom does a woman hate most? – Thus spoke the iron to the magnet: ‘I hate you most because you attract, but are not strong enough to attract me to you.’ The happiness of a man says: I will. The happiness of a woman says: he wills.

__________________________________________________ ______________

On Little Women Old and Young

“Why do you creep about so timidly in the twilight, Zarathustra? And
what do you conceal so cautiously beneath your coat?
Is it a treasure that was given to you? Or a child that was born to
you? Or do you yourself now walk the paths of thieves, you friend of the
evil?” –
“Indeed, my brother!” spoke Zarathustra. “It is a treasure that was
given to me: it is a little truth, which I carry.
But it is unruly like a young child, and if I do not hold its mouth shut,
then it cries out too loudly.
As I went my way alone today, at the hour when the sun sets, I met a
little old woman and she spoke thus to my soul:
‘Much has Zarathustra spoken also to us women, and yet he has never
spoken to us about woman.’
And I replied to her: ‘About woman one should speak only to men.’
‘Speak to me too about woman,’ she said. ‘I am old enough to forget it
right away.’
And I humored the little old woman and spoke thus to her:
Everything about woman is a riddle, and everything about woman has
one solution: it is called pregnancy.
A man is for woman a means: the end is always the child. But what is
woman for a man?
Two things the real man wants: danger and play. That is why he wants
woman as the most dangerous plaything.
A man should be raised for war and woman for the recreation of the
warrior: everything else is folly.

First Part

Fruits that are all too sweet – these the warrior does not like. Therefore
he likes woman; even the sweetest woman is still bitter.
Better than a man, woman understands children, but a man is more
childish than a woman.
In the real man a child is concealed: it wants to play. Up now, you
women, go discover the child in the man!
Let woman be a plaything, pure and fine, like a gemstone radiated by
the virtues of a world that does not yet exist.
Let the ray of a star shine in your love! Let your hope be called: ‘May
I give birth to the overman!’
Let courage be in your love!With your love you should throw yourself
at him who makes you afraid!
Let your honor be in your love! Otherwise woman understands little
about honor. But let this be your honor: always to love more than you are
loved, and never to be second.
Let a man be afraid of a woman when she loves; then she makes any
sacrifice, and every other thing is without value to her.
Let a man be afraid of a woman when she hates; for at the bottom of
his soul a man is merely evil, but woman is bad there.
Whom does a woman hate most? – Thus spoke the iron to the magnet:
‘I hate you most because you attract, but are not strong enough to attract
me to you.’
The happiness of a man says: I will. The happiness of a woman says:
he wills.
‘Behold, just now the world became perfect!’ – Thus thinks every
woman when she obeys out of total love.
And a woman must obey and find a depth for her surface. Surface is
a woman’s disposition, a flexible, stormy skin over shallow water. But a
man’s disposition is deep, his stream roars in underground caves; woman
intuits his strength but does not comprehend it.” –
Then the little oldwoman replied to me: “Much that is sweet Zarathustra
has said, and especially for those who are young enough for it.
Peculiar, though, that Zarathustra knows women only little, and yet he
is right about them! Does this happen because with women nothing is
impossible?
And now, by way of thanks, accept a little truth! Surely I amold enough
for it!

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Bundle it up and hold its mouth shut, or else it will cry out too loudly,
this little truth.”
“Give me your little truth, woman!” I said. And thus spoke the little
old woman:
“You go to women? Do not forget the whip!”

–

Thus spoke Zarathustra.

Quote from Unregistered

The only aspect of a man that women do not have is more strength and unfortunatly men have used this thoughout history to opress women as a means of maintaining their own masculine identity.

The only aspect of a man that women do not have is more strength and unfortunatly men have used this thoughout history to opress women as a means of maintaining their own masculine identity

here it is ! a tirade of feminit lore ! - but what about inventing civilization mathematics the wheel aeroplanes steel ships refrigeration atomic physics rubics cube

wimyn are what they always were incompetent and sly !

wimyn invented abortion DV rip-off divorces chld abuse ( oh yes here they excel)