It seems the world is going to hell in a hand-basket lately.
The economy seems stuck on a long line of “brink of collapse” circumstances, continually being propped up by various schemes and distortions of facts which seem more intent on fooling the population than presenting proper solutions. Oil is gushing from the bottom of the sea, a grave concern with the only silver lining being the Enviro-Marxists have quit screeching disinformation about “Climate Change” for a few months. Who wants to bet that the whole globaloney warming scam will be brushed under the carpet and conveniently forgotten? They were losing that battle to the internet anyways and must be grateful to have a real emergency to distract from their dishonesty.
On top of all these economic and environmental crises lies an even deeper set of problems: family break-down, the complete transformation of Patriarchy’s Marriage1.0 into the new Marxist version of Matriarchy’s Marriage 2.0, which we all know is a complete fraud and should be avoided like the plague. Our birth-rates are dropping which poses serious long-term dangers to our civilization as burdensome debts will force us to take third-world cultures into our own populations and we will witness the destruction of Western Civilization’s cultural pillars as we incorporate ever-more foreign principles into every sphere under the feel-good rainbow of “Multiculturalism.”
But also, the men’s movement seems to be at an impasse. There has been a lot of information that has been put forth over the past few years, and the MM’s message is most certainly much more in the consciousness of the population in general… however, the consciousness what we have arrived at is that we are f*cked as a civilization, and there’s not a thing we can do about it but rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic so we might better enjoy our demise as the band plays on. In this case, the band appears to be mostly female and they are playing most triumphantly, as after all, they are still employed and as long as they have their jobs and their violins, nothing can harm them.
As many of us know, this was no accident. Captain Marx and his crew set us upon this course many decades ago through a variety of techniques and manipulations. However, in the midst of all of this confusion is also unique opportunity. No-one will really say too much if we start breaking the Titanic’s tables and ripping up the floor-planking to build our own rafts, will they? The hole is already in the hull… the ship is doomed. Maybe while the officers are firing off their guns to ensure it be women and children first, the men should abandon the lifeboat queue altogether and Go Our Own Way.
Related to this idea is the often repeated principle that what is really going on with women right now is there are two sides to the argument: The women that wish for men to be collective slaves for the Daddy Government scheme of extracting male resources collectively to transfer to women and children (Feminist Women), and those women who wish for men to be their personal slaves, so that individual women and their children can directly extract resources from men (Conservative Women). The man-slaves are quite irrelevant in the whole discussion as, after all, we are mere fourth-class citizens, behind the children and the family dog… but amidst all the bickering, here is our chance to bolt out the back door and escape into the night!
But where do we go? What will we do? Ultimately we have to…? There are a plethora of questions which arise – what will the future hold?
After the feminists and gay rights activists have had their way with making marriage into anything which they wished it to be, marriage no longer has any meaning – fighting for it will be a fools errand as the marriage trail has been booby-trapped so much, it’s best to just leave it there for them to negotiate. They can have at ‘er!
Have a read of the following quotes:
“Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so… Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society. … As a lesbian, I am fundamentally different from non-lesbian women. … In arguing for the right to legal marriage, lesbians and gay men would be forced to claim that we are just like heterosexual couples, have the same goals and purposes, and vow to structure our lives similarly. … We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society’s views of reality…” – Paula Ettelbrick, “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?”, in William Rubensteins, ed., Lesbians, Gay Men and the Law (New York: The New Press, 1993), pp. 401-405
“A middle ground might be to fight for same sex marriage and its benefits, and then, once granted, redefine the institution completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.” – Michelangelo Signorile, “Bridal Wave,” OUT Magazine, December/January 1994, p. 161
“[W]omen, like men, should not have to bear children… The destruction of the biological family, never envisioned by Freud, will allow the emergence of new men and women, different from any people who have previously existed.” – Alison Jagger, Political Philosophies of Women’s Liberation: Feminism and Philosophy, (Totowa, NJ: Littlefield Adams & co. 1977)
First of all, to the radicals intent on re-ordering society to their whims… thanks for asking the rest of us if we wanted society to be re-ordered!
But, let’s face it folks, these people have been successful in their goals. Over the past few decades, the entire concepts of family and marriage have been successfully subverted and the further steps of re-ordering the family with new societal mores are fast taking place.
Women have re-ordered the family according to their whim from one end, and the gay marriage movement has been re-ordering the hell out of it from the other end. It’s like a big orgy! Apparently the only people who are missing from the debate are heterosexual males… we get the whipping boy position, but we don’t speak for our interests.
Although, as I previously said: I don’t think men should fight for marriage. Hell no! I know a lot of times it seems that men pine for “the good old days of patriarchy,” but really, that is just an acknowledgement that patriarchy “works,” despite all its short-comings. And the short-comings were plenty. It has never been all that great of a deal for a man to be married, and even in the height of patriarchy, a woman could drive a man insane. To illustrate this, one needs only to read The Lamentations of Matheolus which was written around 700 years ago, to see that marriage has never been a bed of roses for men:
“This female clock is really driving me mad, for her quarrelsome din doesn't stop for a moment. The tongue of a quarrelsome woman never tires of chiming in. She even drowns out the sound of the church bell. A nagging wife couldn't care less whether her words are wise or foolish, provided that the sound of her own voice can be heard. She simply pursues her own ends; there's not a grain of sense in what she says; in fact she finds it impossible to have a decent thought. She doesn't want her husband to be the boss and finds fault with everything he does. Rightly or wrongly, the husband has no choice: he has to put up with the situation and keep his mouth shut if he wants to remain in one piece. No man, however self disciplined or clear-sighted he may be, can protect himself adequately against this. A husband has to like what the wife likes, and disapprove of what she hates and criticize what she criticizes so that her opinions appear to be right. So anyone who wishes to immolate himself on the altar of marriage will have a lot to put up with. Fifteen times, both day and night, he will suffer without respite and he will be sorely tormented. Indeed, I believe that this torture is worse than the torments of hell, with its chains, fire, and iron.”
Yikes! Some things are timeless! Why should men fight to return to that prison cell?
Patriarchal marriage was about providing for children and women within society in the past. Remember, they didn’t have birth control much beyond abstinence, and the job of homemaking was a lot more real work back in the days before electric stoves, microwaves and washing machines. Marriage was originally a way of attaching men’s productive output to women and children for the betterment of society as a whole. Daniel Amneus calls this “putting sex to work” in his online book, The Case for Father Custody.
The “engine” that made patriarchy work, however, was not “the civilizing effects of women” on men. That is a lie. Women have a de-civilizing effect when left to their own devices. Just have a look around the Matriarchy. The “engine” of patriarchy was giving men a vested interest in society through children.
Think about the move radicals have made to make all children “legitimate.” This was something that was done in Lenin’s Soviet Union as well. Why?
I remember once reading an op-ed piece, or a comment somewhere – I don’t quite remember where anymore - but the author had been around for a while, and was reflecting upon a conversation he once had with Daniel Amneus where they concluded that the “solution” to all of men’s problems essentially comes down to Father Custody. This is the “core” of the issue – not marriage, but the products of the marriage: the children.
Let them, the feminists and the gay marriage movement, fight over marriage and redefine it right into the dirt. They can have our prison if they want it so badly. What men ought to do is stand back and examine what parts of patriarchy are essential in making that engine work, and take the usable parts away while leaving the rest for the vultures to argue over.
Over the next while, I would like to examine this aspect a little closer and try to illustrate how it is that “Father Custody” is the root of the patriarchal engine, as well as the overall solution for men. Can women be left out of this equation? In the past, women were brought along with the deal of providing children for a man, and in this way, they were also provided for. However, as the “mancession” has aptly illustrated, women don’t need our labour anymore. We get the message: Men are irrelevant to women.
The question now becomes, do men still need women?
The economy seems stuck on a long line of “brink of collapse” circumstances, continually being propped up by various schemes and distortions of facts which seem more intent on fooling the population than presenting proper solutions. Oil is gushing from the bottom of the sea, a grave concern with the only silver lining being the Enviro-Marxists have quit screeching disinformation about “Climate Change” for a few months. Who wants to bet that the whole globaloney warming scam will be brushed under the carpet and conveniently forgotten? They were losing that battle to the internet anyways and must be grateful to have a real emergency to distract from their dishonesty.
On top of all these economic and environmental crises lies an even deeper set of problems: family break-down, the complete transformation of Patriarchy’s Marriage1.0 into the new Marxist version of Matriarchy’s Marriage 2.0, which we all know is a complete fraud and should be avoided like the plague. Our birth-rates are dropping which poses serious long-term dangers to our civilization as burdensome debts will force us to take third-world cultures into our own populations and we will witness the destruction of Western Civilization’s cultural pillars as we incorporate ever-more foreign principles into every sphere under the feel-good rainbow of “Multiculturalism.”
But also, the men’s movement seems to be at an impasse. There has been a lot of information that has been put forth over the past few years, and the MM’s message is most certainly much more in the consciousness of the population in general… however, the consciousness what we have arrived at is that we are f*cked as a civilization, and there’s not a thing we can do about it but rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic so we might better enjoy our demise as the band plays on. In this case, the band appears to be mostly female and they are playing most triumphantly, as after all, they are still employed and as long as they have their jobs and their violins, nothing can harm them.
As many of us know, this was no accident. Captain Marx and his crew set us upon this course many decades ago through a variety of techniques and manipulations. However, in the midst of all of this confusion is also unique opportunity. No-one will really say too much if we start breaking the Titanic’s tables and ripping up the floor-planking to build our own rafts, will they? The hole is already in the hull… the ship is doomed. Maybe while the officers are firing off their guns to ensure it be women and children first, the men should abandon the lifeboat queue altogether and Go Our Own Way.
Related to this idea is the often repeated principle that what is really going on with women right now is there are two sides to the argument: The women that wish for men to be collective slaves for the Daddy Government scheme of extracting male resources collectively to transfer to women and children (Feminist Women), and those women who wish for men to be their personal slaves, so that individual women and their children can directly extract resources from men (Conservative Women). The man-slaves are quite irrelevant in the whole discussion as, after all, we are mere fourth-class citizens, behind the children and the family dog… but amidst all the bickering, here is our chance to bolt out the back door and escape into the night!
But where do we go? What will we do? Ultimately we have to…? There are a plethora of questions which arise – what will the future hold?
After the feminists and gay rights activists have had their way with making marriage into anything which they wished it to be, marriage no longer has any meaning – fighting for it will be a fools errand as the marriage trail has been booby-trapped so much, it’s best to just leave it there for them to negotiate. They can have at ‘er!
Have a read of the following quotes:
“Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so… Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, and family, and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society. … As a lesbian, I am fundamentally different from non-lesbian women. … In arguing for the right to legal marriage, lesbians and gay men would be forced to claim that we are just like heterosexual couples, have the same goals and purposes, and vow to structure our lives similarly. … We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society’s views of reality…” – Paula Ettelbrick, “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?”, in William Rubensteins, ed., Lesbians, Gay Men and the Law (New York: The New Press, 1993), pp. 401-405
“A middle ground might be to fight for same sex marriage and its benefits, and then, once granted, redefine the institution completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.” – Michelangelo Signorile, “Bridal Wave,” OUT Magazine, December/January 1994, p. 161
“[W]omen, like men, should not have to bear children… The destruction of the biological family, never envisioned by Freud, will allow the emergence of new men and women, different from any people who have previously existed.” – Alison Jagger, Political Philosophies of Women’s Liberation: Feminism and Philosophy, (Totowa, NJ: Littlefield Adams & co. 1977)
First of all, to the radicals intent on re-ordering society to their whims… thanks for asking the rest of us if we wanted society to be re-ordered!
But, let’s face it folks, these people have been successful in their goals. Over the past few decades, the entire concepts of family and marriage have been successfully subverted and the further steps of re-ordering the family with new societal mores are fast taking place.
Women have re-ordered the family according to their whim from one end, and the gay marriage movement has been re-ordering the hell out of it from the other end. It’s like a big orgy! Apparently the only people who are missing from the debate are heterosexual males… we get the whipping boy position, but we don’t speak for our interests.
Although, as I previously said: I don’t think men should fight for marriage. Hell no! I know a lot of times it seems that men pine for “the good old days of patriarchy,” but really, that is just an acknowledgement that patriarchy “works,” despite all its short-comings. And the short-comings were plenty. It has never been all that great of a deal for a man to be married, and even in the height of patriarchy, a woman could drive a man insane. To illustrate this, one needs only to read The Lamentations of Matheolus which was written around 700 years ago, to see that marriage has never been a bed of roses for men:
“This female clock is really driving me mad, for her quarrelsome din doesn't stop for a moment. The tongue of a quarrelsome woman never tires of chiming in. She even drowns out the sound of the church bell. A nagging wife couldn't care less whether her words are wise or foolish, provided that the sound of her own voice can be heard. She simply pursues her own ends; there's not a grain of sense in what she says; in fact she finds it impossible to have a decent thought. She doesn't want her husband to be the boss and finds fault with everything he does. Rightly or wrongly, the husband has no choice: he has to put up with the situation and keep his mouth shut if he wants to remain in one piece. No man, however self disciplined or clear-sighted he may be, can protect himself adequately against this. A husband has to like what the wife likes, and disapprove of what she hates and criticize what she criticizes so that her opinions appear to be right. So anyone who wishes to immolate himself on the altar of marriage will have a lot to put up with. Fifteen times, both day and night, he will suffer without respite and he will be sorely tormented. Indeed, I believe that this torture is worse than the torments of hell, with its chains, fire, and iron.”
Yikes! Some things are timeless! Why should men fight to return to that prison cell?
Patriarchal marriage was about providing for children and women within society in the past. Remember, they didn’t have birth control much beyond abstinence, and the job of homemaking was a lot more real work back in the days before electric stoves, microwaves and washing machines. Marriage was originally a way of attaching men’s productive output to women and children for the betterment of society as a whole. Daniel Amneus calls this “putting sex to work” in his online book, The Case for Father Custody.
The “engine” that made patriarchy work, however, was not “the civilizing effects of women” on men. That is a lie. Women have a de-civilizing effect when left to their own devices. Just have a look around the Matriarchy. The “engine” of patriarchy was giving men a vested interest in society through children.
Think about the move radicals have made to make all children “legitimate.” This was something that was done in Lenin’s Soviet Union as well. Why?
I remember once reading an op-ed piece, or a comment somewhere – I don’t quite remember where anymore - but the author had been around for a while, and was reflecting upon a conversation he once had with Daniel Amneus where they concluded that the “solution” to all of men’s problems essentially comes down to Father Custody. This is the “core” of the issue – not marriage, but the products of the marriage: the children.
Let them, the feminists and the gay marriage movement, fight over marriage and redefine it right into the dirt. They can have our prison if they want it so badly. What men ought to do is stand back and examine what parts of patriarchy are essential in making that engine work, and take the usable parts away while leaving the rest for the vultures to argue over.
Over the next while, I would like to examine this aspect a little closer and try to illustrate how it is that “Father Custody” is the root of the patriarchal engine, as well as the overall solution for men. Can women be left out of this equation? In the past, women were brought along with the deal of providing children for a man, and in this way, they were also provided for. However, as the “mancession” has aptly illustrated, women don’t need our labour anymore. We get the message: Men are irrelevant to women.
The question now becomes, do men still need women?
