Would You Take a Bullet for a Feminist?

November 20, 2012

rosie3.gif



The answer reveals how feminism is shredding the social fabric, and reengineering the human race. 




Men instinctively sacrifice to protect their own. But feminists don't belong to anyone. When men no longer defend their wives and families, they will not defend their country and the values that make it thrive.  



by Henry Makow Ph.D.


(Update of a staple from July 2003) 


On July 20, 2012, during the Aurora Theater Massacre, three men took a bullet to protect their girlfriends and two died. 

For the purposes of this article, let's assume Jim Stone is mistaken and the attack actually did take place. Here is the story of male sacrifice


 
batmanshotting.jpeg
"Three survivors of the Colorado movie-theater massacre escaped with minor wounds, but were left with broken hearts because their heroic boyfriends died saving them.

In final acts of valor, Jon Blunk, Matt McQuinn and Alex Teves used their bodies to shield their girlfriends as accused madman James Holmes turned the Aurora cineplex into a shooting gallery.

Blunk's girlfriend, Jansen Young; McQuinn's girlfriend, Samantha Yowler; and Teves' gal pal Amanda Lindgren made it out of the bloodbath -- but they would have been killed had it not been for the loves of their lives.

"He's a hero, and he'll never be forgotten," a tearful Jansen Young told the Daily News of Blunk. "Jon took a bullet for me."

Jansen Young, 21, said Blunk took her to see Friday's midnight premiere of "The Dark Knight Rises" to celebrate her graduation from veterinarian school. As the black-clad killer burst into the theater and unleashed tear gas and a torrent of indiscriminate gunfire, Blunk selflessly protected his girlfriend.

He pushed Jansen on the ground and under her seat, then threw his body on top of her, the mother said. "He was 6-feet-2, in incredible shape, which is why he was able to push her down under the seats of the theater," the mother said. "He pushed her down on the floor and laid down on top of her and he died there."

Equally heroic was the 24-year-old [Alex] Teves, who hurled his girlfriend to the floor as bullets whizzed through the theater.

"He pushed her to the floor to save her and he ended up getting a bullet," said his aunt, Barbara Slivinske, 57. "He was gonna hit the floor himself, but he never made it."

Samantha Yowler had a similar story of horror and heroism about her boyfriend, Matt McQuinn, whose last living act was to shield her from death. Yowler, 26, survived with a gunshot wound to the knee and is in fair condition after undergoing surgery."


MEN ACTED INSTINCTIVELY


Men instinctively protect their own. But feminists don't belong to any man and make a point of being independent. If your girlfriend was a feminist, would you protect her with your life, as these men did? 

If you were married to one, would you risk your life for her? If society awarded your children to her, would you sacrifice for them? 

If not, would there be any point in dying for your country? Feminism clearly sabotages the social contract, which is heterosexual by nature.

By "feminism" I'm not talking about women receiving equal opportunity (in fact, they often receive preferential treatment.) I am talking about a bogus gender ideology that the financial elite is using to destabilize and depopulate society. This ideology denies the natural differences between men and women, encouraging women to behave like men and vice versa. 


steinem.jpeg

(l.Gloria Steinen, making Masonic sign.) 

POSSESSION

If you want to get a man's attention, give him power. A man will not sacrifice himself for woman or family unless they belong to him, i.e. are part of him. 

Feminism has made the idea of a man "possessing" a woman distinctly unfashionable but this is what both sexes actually want. It mirrors the sex act.

As I have said, the heterosexual contract involves the exchange of female power for male love. If she has chosen wisely, a woman will receive more love as she completely surrenders herself. 

Self-sacrifice is how women show love. Men feel this and it inspires their love and sacrifice. Woman's love takes the form of trust, faith, patience, acceptance, adaptability, support and much more. 

For a man, possession (and the responsibility and trust it implies) is the most satisfying aspect of his relationship. 

Conversely, the more power a woman demands, the less male love she will receive. She can have love or power, but she can't have both. Feminists are consigning many women to lives of bitterness and solitude. 

When women demand power, they become male and compete with men. They neuter themselves and the men in their lives. 

Feminists will say I am portraying male tyranny but I am not. A loving man nurtures his wife and wants her to flourish. He consults her and tries to please her. She is in charge of certain domains, which aren't necessarily traditional. She has her own personality, work and views. For example, my wife doesn't share many of my opinions.

Nevertheless my wife adjusts to me. I feel free. She has made all other women redundant and freed me to pursue my work. Miraculously, she is happy too. 

PUTTING WOMEN ON A PEDESTAL 

To surrender power for love is feminine. When men do it, they become women. Women lose respect.

Unconsciously women seek to be overwhelmed by a man. So when a man puts her on a pedestal (because he wants sex or love) he is defeating himself. 

power.jpeg
(Women seek power, but in a man.

Women are naturally hypergamous: they seek men with greater power or status. A man can keep her respect by providing responsible firm leadership. He should avoid showing weakness. If she proves difficult, he should cut his losses . If you want to get a woman's attention, show her the door. 

A man must have a vision of life that is independent of a woman but involves her. According to psychiatrist Helene Deutsch, ("The Psychology of Women," 1948) women are masochistic-narcissistic. They want to be put to use as wives and mothers, and loved for their sacrifice . They want to be needed. 

A woman's most important decision is her choice of a man. Her life will be based on his vision for better or for worse. 

It is tragic to see young women squandering their innocence on men who only want sex. Beauty is partly based on innocence. Why are these girls fixated on their physical appearance to the total neglect of their inner beauty, mind, character and personality? 

How about it men. if your girlfriend or wife were a feminist, would you take a bullet for her? 

--
Related - Possessiveness is Part of Marriage

"According to psychologists (and divorce lawyers) who see couples struggling with such changes, many relationships follow the same pattern: First, the wife starts to lose respect for her husband, then he begins to feel emasculated, and then sex dwindles to a full stop."

Power is the Ultimate Aphrodisiac


First Comment by Dan:

In all cultures and ages, the women and children would be pulled from a burning building before a man.  When the ocean liner Titanic went down in 1912 without enough life boats, the men loaded the boats with all the women and children first.  Even the high status banker John Jacob Astor - ruthless in business with other men - was denied a place on a lifeboat.  Legend goes that Astor tried in vain to bribe Second Officer Charles Lightoller, but the 'women and children first' rule was firm.

The rule still holds today.  Just last week, 4 US veterans died getting their wives off a parade float that got stuck on railroad tracks.  All four men were killed in the train collision, but they'd saved the women.  True Story.

Midland, Texas Train Crash: Hero Vets Die Saving Wives
http://www.onenewspage.us/n/US/74ritwdpg/Hero-Vets-Die-Saving-Wives-in-Texas-Parade.htm

That's natural and heroic - and expected.  But as "girlwriteswhat" on YouTube has eloquently explained, feminism changed the equation so that instead of female getting a willing male to support and protect her -- she gets unwilling males to pay alimony and child support, and expects protection from the State.

Guess what:  this news story didn't run on JEZEBEL.com or any of the feminist websites I surveyed.

This is a clip of a feminist gang disturbing the peace at lecture by male activist Warren Farrell.
Farrell had been active in the 2nd wave feminism during the 1970's, but quit his job at the National Organization of Women when their anti-male and anti-father lobbying went beyond the pale.  This occurred at the University of Toronto, where Farrell was scheduled to give a talk on "From Boys to Men: Beyond the Boy's Crisis"  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zb9FZn6Lqg0&feature=youtu.be

It happened again in Memphis last week.  Farrell is the author of "The Myth of Male Power".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jckfL4LdBtQ&list=FLcmnLu5cGUGeLy744WS-fsg&index=2&feature=plcp

And in Vancouver, BC, over a lawfully posted pamplet, "Men's rights are human rights".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RBXVpoMlu4

Men's rights are human rights homepage:

http://www.mensrightsarehumanrights.com/


Comments for "Would You Take a Bullet for a Feminist?"

Rich said (November 22, 2012):

My comment is real short this time, lol. Just some video links adding more info to the deception of Feminism.
__________________

Feminism is a Terrorist Organization - Erin Pizzey on Feminism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix5-jqQYU1M&feature=g-upl

Feminism Was Created To Destabilize Society, Tax Women and set up the NWO - Aaron Russo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCpjmvaIgNA&feature=g-upl

MISANDRY - MEN Don't EXIST in the Media.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNqX-k8y6RA

Feminism, Pt 1 - Defining the Feminist Problem (By a woman)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rduhZqYdZJg&feature=channel&list=UL
___________


Olga said (November 21, 2012):

Three men from the whole theater?

We do not count those who grabbed their girlfriends and used them as the shield against bullets, right?

Because those girlfriends do not talk anymore.
There are few and between men who will protect anyone, especially when it comes to their lives.

Who is seeding their seeds widely?
Irresponsible jerks who do not care how their kids will live.
Cain had plenty children and Abel had none.

Calculate of probability to find Godly person. According to science/statistics - 5%.

Contemporary men would not take the bullet for their own mother, would not come to nursing home, would not send her $1 dollar.

95% would NOT!!!

Though I am against feminism, because it is double slavery for women first of all and liberation for men from all responsibilities, but you have to look for roots of feminism in the low men's behavior first of all!


Ashley said (November 21, 2012):

Something similar – back in 1976, when South African males were conscripted to fight the Communist terrorists coming in across our borders (the ones who now rule us), I found myself at a camp that was a staging-base for the troops going up north, and became friendly with the other few men who regularly stood in line to eat the camp rations at mealtimes.

Having known one of them for a few weeks, he finally told me, with an agonized look on his face, that during this three-month border duty of ours, he had heard from his friends back home how his wife was unable to contain herself for this short time, and was becoming decidedly friendly with other men of her acquaintance, while here he was, more than a thousand kilometres away, being forced to defend her right to be unfaithful to him.

It then struck me that, if enough wives behaved in this fashion, there would be no reason for the men of our country to put their lives on the line for a bunch of immoral women back home who had not the slightest regard for their husbands’ sacrifices (in our 3-month stint, 49 soldiers died, apart from the horribly-mangled survivors of mine explosions, those who had their legs blown off with RPG-7 rockets, etc.), nor any intention of enduring a little hardship for the maintenance of their marriages.

By destroying the sanctity of Christian marriage through the promotion of feminism, our enemies have found the perfect weapon to obliterate the will of the men of any nation to defend the territorial integrity of their countries. NWO, here we come!


Peter said (November 21, 2012):

Such a poignant story Henry.


But the Aurora "massacre" didn't happen at all.
Theres a huge amount of evidence to say so too like the local police discussing if they were all in the right positions just before the drill went "live" recorded on the police radio net.
Like the total absence of blood in the auditorium itself. Like the complete absence of surveillance video from the scene.

Like the fact the the survivors have been positively identified as professional actors by name. Like the fact that they got Tom Cruise (i kid you not) to play the role of the Emergency ward doctor in the local hospital. Man what a shambles!. BTW I would still not take a bullet for a feminist. Keep up the good work


Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at