Yup, Anti-Feminists keep popping up out of the woodwork everywhere...
Here are some excerpts of a preface from the book:
... Feminism in this and in some other countries has won well-nigh [near] all its formal demands.
...and so the pitch-forking of women into administrative posts proceeds galore. But the main contentions of The Fraud of Feminism have not been affected by the change in question.
Though women have been conceded all the rights of men, their privileges as females have remained untouched, while the sentimental "pull" they have over men, and the favouritism shown them in the courts, civil and criminal, often in flagrant violation of elementary justice, continues as before.
The result of their position on juries, as evinced in certain trials, has rather confirmed the remarks made in Chapter II. anent [concerning] hysteria than otherwise.
The sex-bias of men in favour of women and the love of the advanced woman towards her sex-self show no sign of abatement.
Proposals to the effect that in the event of infanticide by a mother the putative father should be placed in the dock merely because he is a man are received with applause.
The other day, at a court held in a fashionable town of the south coast, on a prostitute being brought upcharged with soliciting, a female "justice," recently appointed, declaimed against the wickedness of punishing prostitutes for soliciting while men were never brought up charged with the offence. (Needless to say, there was the usual male fool to be found in the body of the court, who shouted:"Hear ! Hear !")
Now is it conceivable, I ask, that anybody can be so infatuated with Feminism as not to see that a prostitute who solicits nightly in the exercise of her trade-- i.e . for the purpose of money-making--is in a different position from a man who, once in a way, may, urged by natural passion, make advances to a woman?
Such a person must be unable to see distinctions in anything, one would think. Besides, it is not true that men, if charged with the annoyance or molestation of women, cannot be, and have not been, prosecuted for the offence.
The lady "justice" in question would probably like to see a man paired with a prostitute in the dock every time the latter gave occasion for police action. Such is the Feminist notion of justice.
There are a vast number of men who cultivate the pretence of having a contempt for, or a prejudice against, their own sex. The idea seems to be to pander to the sex-vanity of the "New Woman."
Every popular writer caters for this prejudice.
No one can have failed to notice the persistent journalistic and literary "stunt" by which the man is portrayed in the light of a miserable and abject living creature as a foil [frustration] to the "noble animal"woman.
There is scarcely a play, short story or novel the plot of which in any way admits of it where this now stale device is not dragged in in some form or shape.
... This sort of thing is not without its influence on the course of justice, as the daily papers still continue to show us. Times have not changed in this respect.
... There is no indication that the general public has a dawning sense that, to adapt the common metaphor, "What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."
Everywhere we hear the same old bogus grievances of the female sex trotted out as crying for remedy, but never the injustice of a man being compelled, whatever his economic position, to keep his wife, while a woman is under no corresponding obligation to keep her husband. No urgency is suggested for removing the anomaly that a husband is amenable for his wife's libels and slanders; none that a boy of fourteen is punishable for a sexual offence to which he has been incited by a girl of sixteen, who gets off scot-free; none that the obligation of a husband, whose wife wishes to bring an action for divorce against him, to furnish her with the money to fight him, should be abolished.
On the other hand, every law, every judicial decision, every case in the courts, civil and criminal, that on the most superficial view can be exploited by the conventional Feminist claptrap to prove the wickedness of "man-made law" to woman, is gripped by the beak of the Feminist harpy to help build up her nest of lying sex-prejudice, whence she and her confraternity may sally forth and by their raids on male sentiment not merely help to buttress up existing female privilege, but wherever possible to increase the already one-sided injustice of the law and its administration towards men in the interest of the other sex.
DID YOU MISS THE DATE?
Still believe in "equity feminism?"
Still believe that the suffragettes were noble creatures fighting to "liberate" women?
Still believe that it was only second wave feminists that were fucked up?
There was no such thing as second wave feminism, people. When you read up on women's behaviour in the 1920's they were already getting out of hand... then the Great Depression happened, re-uniting men and women, crushing fembot lunacy with the hard reality of poverty... then World War II happened, compounding upon the depression... then we came out of the war, and within one generation, "Second Wave Feminism" picked up right where those responsible for Suffragette Feminism left off in the 20's.
There is something deep within women's nature that makes them antagonistic and hostile to men. This has been acknowledged since the Bible where God tells Adam that he will put enmity between him and the woman.
We think that Warren Farrell is the only guy who has written about feminism from the male perspective, when in fact, we men are doing ourselves a MASSIVE dis-service by refusing to acknowledge the plethora of literature that has been written about "Gender Studies" from the dawn of time up until WWII. Yet we think somehow think that we are discovering something new.
Every MRA who spends countless hours a year on MRM forums should spend a few evenings sifting through the writings of those before our times, and compare them to the issues we are facing today.
Here are two good places to start:
(read the fundamental arguments at the beginning which are excellent, and then scroll down to find a reading list about "gender studies" that is in chronological order and spans centuries.
It's up to you. You once discovered that you were living in the "Matriarchy" and you chose to unplug... do you think it is impossible, after that experience, that there could possibly be even a deeper level to this whole thing?