Men's Movement: Flipside of Feminism?
June 10, 2015
The Striking Similarities Between
the Men's Rights Movement and Feminism
"In essence, feminism is misogynistic and masculism is misandric. Both masquerade as attempts to improve the conditions of their respective gender, but are actually further enslaving them. Both believe the opposite sex is conspiring to keep them down."
Listen to this: Confirms McGuinness Paul Elam To Man Up or Stand Down
from August 2014
by Sean McGuinness
The men's rights movement (or "masculism") is actually just the male counterpart of the feminism it claims to oppose.
The similarities are striking. Both believe their natural gender role is a sign of submission or weakness.
This is what makes both movements so tragic. Feminism teaches young women that getting married, having children and cooperating with their husband is an "artificial social construct" created by the "patriarchy" to keep women down and oppress them.
Feminism teaches that women in secure and loving relationships are not really happy, but are putting on a brave face, and that the real source of happiness for women is being "strong and independent" i.e. rebelling against nature, being vapid, selfish, hedonistic and materialistic.
Masculism applies this ethos to men, encouraging them to behave as teenagers - drinking, playing video games, and having casual, promiscuous sex.
The MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) have terms such as "mangina" and "white knight" for men with families, implying that these men are in a state of servitude.
In essence, feminism is misogynistic and masculism is misandric. Both masquerade as attempts to improve the conditions of their respective gender, but are actually further enslaving them. Both believe the opposite sex is conspiring to keep them down.
GENDER: DIVIDE AND CONQUER
As touched upon before, this is most famous among hardline feminists who claim the "gender is a social construct". This is obviously ridiculous to anyone who possesses critical thinking skills - are breasts social constructs? Are reproductive organs social constructs? Is the woman's natural caring and sensitive demeanour a social construct?
Gender is present in most species of life on Earth, clearly it is not just a social construct, it serves a real, meaningful purpose - to bring children into the world, to be able to protect and provide for them, and thus continue the species to the next generation. The "social construct" line is most commonly found among feminists, who believe it was created by the "patriarchy" to suppress women and put them in a servile state.
The masculist take on this phenomena is that women are parasites who need men to survive. Masculists who adopt the life of eternal bachelors are actually cooperating with their enslavers - who are not the female species, but are an international cabal who seek the destruction of the family unit and the nation-state, paving the way to an open goal of a one world government.
BOTH PROMOTE A MATERIALISTIC AND HEDONISTIC LIFE
Men are encouraged to live a life that revolves around getting drunk, taking drugs, working out and having sex.
We can see this attitude most clearly in the PUA (pick-up artist) section of the manosphere ; pick-up artists' lives revolve around seducing women, having sex with them and never seeing them ever again. To Hell with the consequences.
The MGTOW have a slogan "My Wallet, My Choice" which is a way of saying that men should be able to get women pregnant and avoid the consequences, having nothing to do with his seed. It's preposterous, and something a healthy society wouldn't allow.
Feminists are told to love fashion, shoes, handbags and celebrity, as well as the obvious drinking and casual sex. The obsession with clothing and appearance is taken to whole new levels. The array of beauty products and options for cosmetic surgery and procedures available to today's young female is staggering, and creates a deep dissatisfaction in young women who view themselves as inadequate, because they cannot live up to the impossible standards set by the media. Women are suckered in by this false view family life as boring and useless, and also develop unrealistic expectations. It's a pit of misery, for both sexes and exacerbates all the existing problems. It's a vicious cycle.
Both foster self-love and hyper-individualism. Humans are not solitary animals, we are designed to cooperate with each other for the good of the whole. When we deviate from this, we see nothing but gross unhappiness and the anesthetics needed to cope with it - drugs, alcohol, materialism, promiscuity, gambling, and so on.
A man cannot produce offspring without a woman, and vice-versa. Therefore, without solid and strong bonds, where will children come from? Casual sex is often negated by birth-control methods like abortion. Babies and children need a stable, loving, two-parent home.
Many single-parents do an admirable job in the circumstances that fate sometimes unfortunately deals them, but it's far from ideal and shouldn't be encouraged as a viable, alternative style of parenthood. A child needs both parents around it to survive and grow to its full potential. It's absolutely no coincidence that the birth-rates in every single white, Western nation (those most infected by gender separatism) are below replacement levels. If it continues, the European race will be extinct or very nearly extinct by the year 2100.
Men cannot abdicate their social responsibilities and be considered men. It's time to turn this around, and not be afraid of the agenda, and refuse to play its silly little games.
Sean of http://conserpiracy.boards.net/ with special thanks to "M"
First Comment from KS
Robert is correct. A mangia is a servile man and a white knight is a man who puts women on a pedestal and seeks to accommodate them in any situation regardless of circumstances. Neither term has anything to do with being married or cohabiting. Any man who gets married in the western world is making a huge mistake (as I did). Marriage is a contract between three parties, a man, a woman and the state, and the state can vary the terms at any time without the agreement of the other parties.
I have found sites like Return of Kings and Chateau Heartiste very helpful as an antidote to a life time of feminist brainwashing.
I don't feel 'enslaved' by what I have learned on these sites. For the first time in my life i am having much more satisfactory relationships with both males and females because I am beginning to understand the dynamics at play.
You can learn from these sites. You still have free will and you can make your own decisions and still take responsibility for your own behaviour.
These sites enable males to resume or acquire some control over their lives. Yes, you can use that knowledge to improve your chances of having a lot of casual sex if that is what you want to do. And if you just want to see the world in a much more accurate way, they will help you do that too. Get fit, get healthy, improve your mind, learn a foreign language, achieve your goals and don't let dependance on female validation ruin your life.
See this article on Rodger Elliot