Quote: |
Damn you! You are a squeaking puppy, and so are all those who will submit to be governed by laws which rich men have made for their own security. For the cowardly whelps have not the courage otherwise to defend what they get by their knavery. But damn ye, altogether! Damn them for a pack of crafty rascals, and you, who serve them, for a parcel of hen-hearted numbskulls! They villify us, the scoundrels do, when there is only this difference: they rob the poor under the cover of law, forsooth, and we plunder the rich under the protection of our own courage; had ye not better make one of us, than sneak after the arses of those villains for employment?
| --Black Sam Bellamy, pirate captain
I despair for the Mens Rights Movement. I have done so for some time.
Now, dont get me wrong, I embrace those fellows who, for lack of clear rational thinking, maybe a sequence of misdirections and misunderstandings, have simply failed to see the extent to which thier own thought processes have been built on a foundation that is destined to always bring down the demise of their castle.
Indeed, they are not building a castle, they are building themselves a prison.
By using the building blocks of those most eager to provide the materials, they are unwittingly being led to believe that the security they are helping to ensure will be of benefit to them.
The minute they have built their castle, they have to make a decision.
Do they welcome the workforce into the new home? Or do they turn them away with a sudden capricious change of attitude?
It can be seen that those who successfully manage to achieve their goals via the use of the statists tools, become themselves the new gaurdians of the state.
Welcome to the new prison, that which was supposed to be your refuge, is now locking you in and you must eat the diet provided, move where we tell you, think as you are told, or walk the plank..
Maybe it would help if I pointed out some of the ways the mainstream mens movement fails men on the whole and does not gain acceptance as a force to be reckoned with by the majority of men. (As evidence by the continuing minority status of "mens issues" in society).
Firstly, the mainstream mens movement seems to exist as a counter to feminism.
Now, any gender based ideology will always be flawed by its implicitly apparent desire to appeal to the gender it seeks to represent.
Striaght away, women and feminists will recognise that the movement is, as is feminism, about progressing the interests of one half of the population. Since one cannot add to one side of a balance without affecting the other, it will be deduced intuitively that the gains for men will be at the expense of women..
Any attempts to convince otherwise will simply create endless arguments and when it comes to it, the current winners have all the means of argument stitched up by their orwellian manipulations of speach and thought.
So, it usually ends up that the mens movement takes on the ridiculous and patently stupid notions that the common ground is the feminists vision of "equality"..
Now, that is laughable, or would be if it were not for the fact that it seems most MRA's seriously think equality is a realistic concept that can be applied.
Even more ludicrously, they seem to accept that the feminists definition of equality is suitable for use!
So, striaght off, they are using a concept that is ill suited.
When feminists want equality, they want access to the advantages that men have, and they create a system whereby men give up natural advantages in order to bring women up to that level.
What the MRM fails to realise is that the many natural advantages that men have, are not in anyway as strong individually as the one huge single advantage that women naturally have.
Equalising women in all other regards will then make them all powerful, as can be seen.
This is due to the huge power of female sexuality, control of the reproductive agenda, almost always already accepted as a fair trade off for mens advantages (and policed naturally by men) BEFORE they had been given the excess advantages possessed by men.
How does the mainstream mens movement try to get round this?
By aping feminine characteristics.
By "peddling the myth that men can make better mothers than women" as a gent I know described it..
So, to win, a man must compete for success before the judgemental feminist state on the basis of being better on the feminised criteria than a mother, if we are to use the family courts as an example.
Some men do win.
Some men do indeed manage to turn the tables and aquire what every man desires, control of their own families.
It seems that they then immediately sell out the other men who have not done this, by declaring that they stand for "equal parenting"..
That is well and good.
But, you can have that. That is easy when a man has the ability to provide it, from a position of power.
Indeed, it is desired by those who have the power to do it, probably because, deep down, they dont really want to play mum 7 days a week do they?
The battle of the sexes is a tool used by the state to enable itself to have the deciding vote.
How very obvious to anyone but a fool that when you have forced everyone to accept "equality" as a concept there must then be a judge to decide which of the 2 equal voices wins the day..
Well, I have news for all the fools out there, be they feminists or MRA's..
There are not 2 equal voices.
There is one greater voice who is claiming to be working for you and your children, but is actually completely in control of everything.
And while you as men and women are bashing each other to the order of the state, you are feeding the control freaks who make you argue in the first place and their offers of "help" have a price so steep that you really aught to be regarding them with the disdain you would give a child-abuser who offers to babysit for you..
|
16th-August-2008
