Why are there now a*ti-men advocates coming from men themselves in addition to women and feminists? A*ti-men advocates as Red Pill imposters (under-cover feminists) are the answer? These rad*cals claim in their defiance of reality that men are never to be ‘weak’, ‘soft’ or even acknowledged as victims.
The feminist version of this is that men are sc*m, and st*pid, throw rocks at them, k*ll all men and drink male tears. Is either one pro-men? Both represent m*sandry. If it makes human beings stronger or better by abusing them, as some of these calloused souls claim, then why did the Women’s Liberation Movement and the Civil Rights Movement fight against, rather for, the ab*se and mistreatment of their people? Who are more delusional, the feminists or the religious and trad/con fan*tics (so-called Red-Pillers)?
By this pro-ab*se ‘logic’ men, opp*essed due to their defined masculinity, should be even stronger by enduring the last 50 years of feminism. However, many of them are dead from feminism’s mi*andric effects (su*cide, persecution via laws, deprivation and social condemnation, etc.). How would THEY be categorized, weak men thinned out from a very select few still allowed to live as sl*ves at the expense of other sl*ves who were too ‘weak’ to adequately perform their duties deserving death instead of being treated as equals to women? Men are degraded per a ‘masculine’, disposably-defined existence. Men, mistreated by both camps, are deprived their equal rights as human beings.
Screw what’s being sold as masculinity and such devaluation of human lives. Masculinity be damned! Men are mutually entitled to equality whether they are ‘masculine’ or not with their existence not subjectively defined/devalued by others. If this isn’t a form of toxicity attached to masculinity we are dealing with a lack of basic logic, comprehension and dishonesty.
Accepting mistreatment and ab*se as part of what defines men is predicated on self-h*te. Men are groomed to be mas*chists and women, so high and mighty placed above them (on their pedestal as royalty), are equally groomed to be sadists. If women, or any other group of people, were treated this way wouldn’t that be unacceptable and deemed inhumane? Hell, we even deem the comparable treatment of pets as inhumane.
We see this mistreatment by men against themselves and other men in the realization that both men and women hate men. This premise is well-expressed in traditional misandry (chivalry)–the very core upon which the cancerous tumor feminism itself is built.
Now what? The answer is more of the same or worse, including that prior to what feminism has dished out? God forbid! “But, this is the way I was raised and brought up,” men will say. Yes, indoctrinated. Of course standing up to the tyranny goes against the way you were raised and brought up, because you were raised/born under the umbrella of men’s oppression. It worked just like slavery worked for many centuries to support an economy built upon it. Were you not also given the capability to think for yourself? “Yeah, but the peer pressure exists by calling us pussies and weak or beta males.” Were there not sl*ves who opposed other blacks fighting for their freedom for fear of reprisal too?
So what will happen to the men who are freed? We are told by these Red-Pill tyrants these men are weak, soft and have no purpose. Does this mindset not reveal a likeness to what the slaves experienced when they were freed in 1865? Displaced? Weren’t they also deemed as having no purpose afterwards? The prior hate of the blacks matches the hate of men (rac*al b*gotry/s*x b*gotry) and is further weighted by men hating themselves. If men hate themselves, what do women care? They use this instilled ‘male’ characteristic by pitting men against other men (for their so-called ‘protection’) as does the government in pitting men against each other in war.
Female oppression is a fallacy in the face of men’s real oppression. More proof in common practice is how women refuse to accept, and get away with not accepting, equal accountability to men. Thus, women have not only been ‘liberated’ from the lesser oppression they experienced to now having less accountability to men–some limited legitimacy applies to certain aspects of their lives which were mostly mere trade-offs to men’s roles ironically by which men are still bound. And when women fail to do their part, due to being spoiled and privileged, is when these religious and trad/con people, like performing a scripted play, pop up to impose their misandric beliefs to further oppress men? What the Holy hell!
Anyone with any brains should have realized that women, spoiled under chivalry dictate, were already given too much as it was. And when this privileged, placed-on-a-pedestal status was used to get women even more through feminism’s influence, only an idiot could not see where that was headed.
Why would there be a body of men who suddenly show up claiming they had authority opposing men’s liberation (men going their own way and walking off the plantation), if there wasn’t some alterior motive involved? They completely stand against the very premise of what the Men’s Liberation Movement stands for. [Is the plowhorse that’s controlled by its master an alpha male? Could the eletes want slaves (e.g. sacrificial pawns/cannon fodder) because without them they are powerless? They would have nothing with which to fight their wars.]
But one thing is for certain, neither camp is pro-men. By infiltrating the men’s movement and misrepresenting it, the religious and trad/con groups have derailed the men’s movement in their attempt to sabotage it. They couldn’t serve as better feminist allies. Although both efforts claim to hate the other, it’s merely a big facade, with men not only left out of the equation but further tyrannized with all the damage caused by both groups left unchallenged in the process. This includes all the injustices magnified for men over the past 50 years too.
Like with the sl*ves in the USA prior to 1865, will special laws and policies be passed to identify and round men up who attempt to escape off the plantation (keep men ‘in their place’)? Sounds ridiculous. But, it’s not. This is already occurring. Look up MGTOW on your search engine and see what comes up. People of legitimate men’s groups have been placed on the FBI’s list of potential terrorist groups or organizations. Don’t you find it a bit strange that the more intrusive and coercive religious and trad/con people as well as feminists aren’t placed on this list?
Feminists were at one point in their early career considered to be a subversive effort and potential threat to national security. But apparently due to their successful infiltration they were never brought to justice but instead allowed to take over. The very people who are attacking men are the subversive groups now that project upon men the very thing they are guilty of in their condemning of the legitimate men’s movement. And what is just as troubling is that people are buying it.
Alan Millard continues to be a prominent men’s equality advocate since the early ’80s. He began writing his first book, Equality: A Man’s Claim, in the Spring of 1983. He has been thereafter continually affiliated with the major men’s rights organizations and has contributed many articles, radio, and some television broadcasts. His work includes research conducted through his graduate and doctoral coursework and knowledge acquired through his independent studies and colleague associations as a university professor. He heads the group Men’s Equality on Facebook. He is the author of three books addressing men’s equality concerns. His most recent book, A Flaw From Within: How Women’s Higher Status Defies Equal Justice, Violates Men, and Destroys Society, is available through Amazon.
Discover more from NEWSOFX
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
