About these ads

Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik’s manifesto reveals him to be a rabid antifeminist with views strikingly similar to many MRAs

Anders Breivik Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik, who killed more than 90 people in attacks on Friday, was motivated by a toxic mélange of far-right ideology largely revolving around his intense hatred of Islam. The 1500 page “manifesto” he posted to the internet – what appears to be a grab-bag of his own writing and material cut and pasted from assorted right-wing sites and even the Unabomber’s manifesto  – crackles with denunciations of Muslims, “Marxists” and the assorted other bogeymen that haunt right-wing dreams.

And it’s also filled with denunciations of feminism  that could easily have come from the posts and comments of Men’s Rights and misogynist “manosphere” blogs like The Spearhead, In Mala Fide, and, well, quite a few other sites I write about regularly on this blog. (Not to mention a few of this blog’s misogynist trolls.)  In passage after passage, the ideology is the same, the language is the same, even the specific obsessions are the same – from no-fault divorce to the evils of “Sex and the City.”  (Download the entire thing from the links here.)

I haven’t had time to go through the manifesto in great detail yet, but I wanted to share with you some selections from it that I think will strike most readers of this blog as strangely familiar.

The following selections, denouncing, among other things, the “’Sex and the City’ lifestyle,”appear to have been written by Breivik himself:

It’s the destructive and suicidal “Sex and the City” lifestyle (modern feminism, sexual revolution) which we are taught to revere as the truth. In that setting, men are not men anymore, but metro sexual and emotional beings that are there to serve the purpose as a never-criticising soul mate to the new age feminist woman goddess. The perfect matriarchy has now been fulfilled and complete equality has finally been achieved. The fact that mankind will seize to exist within three generations with this type of regime is irrelevant. Long live cultural Marxism! …

Isolated, “sex and the city lifestyle” is relatively harmless, but if you glorify it and ram it down the throat of mainstream society like we see today it becomes a lethal and destructive societal force as we are witnessing which eventually leads to a complete breakdown of moral/ethics, the nuclear family model and a sustainable fertility rate which again is leading us to the extinction of Europeans.

Breivik goes on to rant about STDs and no-fault divorce, before moving on to another favorite obsession of manosphere misogynists, the supposed sexual “capital” of manipulative women:

Females have a significantly higher proportion of erotic capital than males due to biological differences (men have significantly more prevalent sexual urges than females and are thus easily manipulated). The female manipulation of males has been institutionalised during the last decades and is a partial cause of the feminisation of men in Europe. This highly underestimated factor has contributed to the creation and rise of the matriarchal systems which are now dominating Western European countries. …

He also blames women for the spread of what he considers evil “cultural Marxism” and multiculturalism:

Fact: 60-70% of all cultural Marxists/multiculturalists are women. This partly explains why the gradual feminist revolution is directly linked to the implementation of multiculturalist doctrines. These feminist cultural Marxists do not only want more benefits and rights for themselves. They want it all, and have more or less been awarded with everything they could ever dream of achieving. They now have complete matriarchal supremacy domestically and exercise substantial influence in politics. …

Obsessed with the purported danger that Islam will outbreed the West, Breivik offers an assortment of creepy solutions to increase the fertility of Western whites. (It’s not altogether clear to me if these are all his own views, but they certainly are consistent with what he says elsewhere in the manifesto.)  After suggesting limiting contraception and banning abortion, Breivik offers this “solution”:

Discourage women in general to strive for full time careers. This will involve certain sexist and discriminating policies but should increase the fertility rate by up to 0,1-0,2 points.

Women should not be encouraged by society/media to take anything above a bachelor’s degree but should not be prevented from taking a master or PhD. Males on the other hand should obviously continue to be encouraged to take higher education – bachelor, master and PhD. …

And then he’s back on his “Sex and the City” hobbyhorse:

Discourage women in general to strive for “sex and the city/Madonna” lifestyles. The mass media are currently actively glorifying/encouraging “sex and the city/Madonna” lifestyles which involves the glorification of casual sex, multiple sex partners and generally an extremely liberal individualistic lifestyle hostile to the traditional nuclear family values. As such, the non-restrictions of the mass media is the main cause for our unsustainable fertility rate of 1,5. 

The indirect media/government glorification campaigns through individual artists, various series, movies and media coverage in general should reflect this new shift (no more glorification of “sex and the city lifestyles” or equivalent portrayals. No longer should women be pressured to have equal success regarding their career as males.

Womens “new role” should be actively illustrated and glorified through series, movies and commercials. This will involve significant restrictions in media freedoms and rights. These restrictions and reforms will result in an increased fertility rate of approximately 0,2-0,3 points.

The end result for implementing the above reforms would be an increase in the fertility rate up from 1,5 to approximately 2,1-2,4 which would be sustainable.

However, this will also involve significant restrictions in women’s rights and media rights.

And, like many in the manosphere, he also holds out hope for “artificial wombs,” which would of course reduce the inconvenience of relying on women to cooperate with his plans.

Large chunks of the manifesto consist of cut-and-pasted blog posts from an anonymous far-right Norwegian blogger known as Fjordman, whose now defunct blog can be found here. (According to Andrew Brown in the Guardian article linked to above, Breivik and Fjordman are not the same person.)

Here are some selections from the Fjordman posts that Breivik includes in his manifesto. Again, much of this will seem very familiar to many of you, I am sure.

For all the talk about “girl power” and “women kicking ass” which you see on movies these days, if the men of your “tribe” are too weak or demoralised to protect you, you will be enslaved and crushed by the men from other “tribes” before you can say “Vagina Monologues”. Which means that if you break down men’s masculinity, their willingness and ability to defend themselves and their families, you destroy the country. That’s exactly what Western women have done for the last forty years. ….

The male protective instinct doesn’t take action because Scandinavian women have worked tirelessly to eradicate it, together with everything else that smacks of traditional masculinity. Because of this, feminism has greatly weakened Scandinavia, and perhaps Western civilisation as whole. …

Didn’t feminists always claim that the world would be a better place with women in the driver’s seat, because they wouldn’t sacrifice their own children? Well, isn’t that exactly what they are doing now? Smiling and voting for parties that keep the doors open to Muslim immigration, the same Muslims who will be attacking their children tomorrow? …

Misandry, the hatred of men, isn’t necessarily less prevalent than misogyny, the hatred of women. The difference is that the former is much more socially acceptable.

If all oppression comes from Western men, it becomes logical to try weakening them as much as possible. If you do, a paradise of peace and equality awaits us at the other side of the rainbow. Well congratulations to Western European women. You’ve succeeded in harassing and ridiculing your own sons into suppressing many of their masculine instincts. To your surprise, you didn’t enter a feminist Nirvana, but paved the way for an unfolding Islamic hell. ….

Feminists claim that the reason why women haven’t been as numerous in politics and science as men is due to male oppression of women. Some of this is true. But it is not the whole story. Being male means having to prove something, to achieve something, in a greater way than it does for women. In addition to this, the responsibility for child rearing will always fall more heavily on women than on men. ….

it was in fact the women who started this whole “single is best” culture that now permeates much of the West. Since women initiate most divorces and a divorce can potentially mean financial ruin for a man, it shouldn’t really be too surprising that many men hesitate to get involved at all. … At the same time, women during the past few decades have made it a lot easier to have a girlfriend without getting married. So women make it riskier to get married and easier to stay unmarried, and then they wonder why men “won’t commit?” Maybe too many women didn’t think all this feminism stuff quite through before jumping on the bandwagon? …..

The elaborate welfare state model in Western Europe is frequently labelled as “the nanny state,” but perhaps it could also be named “the husband state.” Why? Well, in a traditional society, the role of men and husbands is to physically protect and financially provide for their women. In our modern society, part of this task has simply been “outsourced” to the state, which helps explain why women in general give a disproportionate support to high taxation and pro-welfare state parties. The state has simply become a substitute husband, upheld by taxation of their ex-husbands. ….

Radical feminism has bred suspicion and hostility, not cooperation. And what’s more, it has no in any way eradicated the basic sexual attraction between feminine women and masculine men. If people do not find this in their own country, they travel to another country or culture to find it, which in our age of globalisation is easier than ever. A striking number of Scandinavian men find their wives in East Asia, Latin America or other nations with a more traditional view of femininity, and a number of women find partners from more conservative countries. …

radical feminism has been one of the most important causes of the current weakness of Western civilisation, both culturally and demographically. Feminists, often with a Marxist world view, have been a crucial component in establishing the suffocating public censorship of Political Correctness in Western nations. They have also severely weakened the Western family structure, and contributed to making the West too soft and self-loathing to deal with aggression from Muslims. …

Well, after two generations of Second Wave Feminism, Ms. Willis and Ms. Beauvoir have had their way: The West has skyrocketing divorce rates and plummeting birth rates, leading to a cultural and demographic vacuum that makes us vulnerable to a take-over by… Islam. And feminists still aren’t satisfied. ….

Feminists claim that women have been victims of men, that men have oppressed women for centuries and that the sexes are equal. Denying this will result in the smears “misogynist” and “male chauvinist pig”. But equalising the sexes has led to a crippling feminisation of Western society … portraying women as oppressed victims and the equals of males is one example of how the pursuit of equality is being used to destroy our society and undermine – and therefore be in conflict with – Mother nature. ….

I’ll continue going through the manifesto to see what else I can find. If any of you decide to do the same thing, and find other selections in it that you find telling, please post them in the comments below.

I would also like to find specific writings on manosphere blogs – posts or comments – that directly parallel these selections from Breivik’s manifesto. If any of you are willing to help, again,  please post your findings in the comments below, along with URLs to the sources of the manosphere quotes.

Ideas have consequences. Vile, hateful ideas have vile, hateful consequences.

For more on Breivik’s misogyny, see this post on Red Light Politics.

PZ Myers has more on Breivik’s noxious ideology, including his hatred of atheists, here.

About these ads

Posted on July 24, 2011, in antifeminism, evil women, marriage strike, men who should not ever be with women ever, MGTOW, misandry, misogyny, MRA, oppressed men, racism, reactionary bullshit, the spearhead, violence against men/women, western women suck. Bookmark the permalink. 744 Comments.

  1. And you compare people who advocated for her release, with folks like Peter Nolan

    Florynce Kennedy, represented Solanas at her trial, calling her “one of the most important spokeswomen of the feminist movement.”

  2. “excess.

    Ok. Those qualifiers mean something.

  3. Marc: Look at Peter Nolan. He is inciting to murder. Look at the comments about Ball’s suicide, where MRAs say that if people don’t start paying attention, and giving them what they want, then there will have to be blood in the streets to “fix it”.

    Meller wants to just wipe out women and replace them with machines.

    The problem with you is you don’t really think any of this stuff. You are running around like a child whose learned a new thing and thinks it applies to everything. You only want feminists to be in favor of hate because it would make your life more exciting. Looking at how hard you try to argue for the “objective” need to do things which are anti-thetical feminism. You want some massive evil to combat, some great intellectual victory.

    Look at the weasel words you use, “the (supposed) original noble goal. You aren’t being honest either.

    Go ahead, let your hate out. We won’t think any less of you.

  4. It’s pretty sick how you use this nutcase to advance your cause.

    Really, I don’t think that you or Hugo Schwyzer care about equality at all….

  5. Hey, I found this by randomly clicking on a sidebar link on Yohami’s blog! I di read a few posts, too… shiver.

    Johnny Milfquest @@MilfQuest
    Reply

    Is it just me or is Avril Lavigne as hot as balls?
    July 21 2011 01:26 am

    yohami

    I liked her a lot when she was 15 years old

    SO, I feel nauseous… what do you all think? Me, I think the guy is a fucking slimeball. Yep, bad news all the way. Yow.

    He also has a post on his blog saying that women shouldn’t play sports unless it makes their legs look nice. But then the authors says “fuck it, no sports for women EVAH.” I’m paraphrasing, but, yeah… Do these guys really want us to take them seriously?

  6. @Marc “Alice Schwarzer also said the SCUM manifesto was “a first excess of hate, of justified hate”.

    J U S T I F I E D

    ok?”

    Oh, christ.

    Marc is really showing his true colors.

  7. @mediumdave
    “I am not surprised that our MRA-sympathizing visitors are trying to minimize both the gravity of his actions and the similarity of his beliefs to those of many in the MRM”

    I guess anytime any woman hurts/kills or wrongfully defames/accuses a man and is a feminist than feminism is to blame.
    ———————————-
    @Lyn
    “I also think that being intelligent doesn’t mean that you can’t be influenced by rants you find on the net”

    Any woman reading any feminist rant has been influenced reguardless of intelligence or lack there of.
    ——————————–
    @Doctress Julia
    “Holy shit, I wish I had some way of detecting these kinds of dudes on sight, so I could never have to be around such extreme toxicness.”

    I’ve seen your comments on feministe, your hatred of men is legendary.
    ———————————–
    @Gregs
    “WOW, according to you article I guess you think that all people of Islam are one Mohammed joke away from flying two planes into a building. MORON”

    Yet everyone here celebrates thier hatred of Christianity.
    ————————————
    @Lyn
    “but he does share some of the same violent, racist and misogynist views, which, I would argue, indicates that there is perhaps a problem with those views. And, the thing is, the dehumanising approaches to groups of people seen in the MRM and in this manifesto do, in a twisted way, justify killing lots of people. This is problematic.”

    Yet backed by the guns of the State feminists are able to steal a mans children and extort ransome. Gain education/employment by gender alone. Kill a mans unborn child while he is helpless to prevent that from happening. This seems equally problematic.
    —————————————-
    @David Futrelle
    “What I am saying is that many MRAs share much of Breivik’s misogynistic ideology. That’s pretty much undeniable.”

    I’ve stated facts about men and women having different inherent biological abilities. I’ve stated facts that hardship women faced in the past men faced an equal hardship. For stating these historical and biological facts I’m deemed a misogynist. Are facts misogynist?
    —————————————–
    PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
    “Phil: two more words-Marc Lépine.”

    Yet in a recent comment Dave forbid me from mentioning a certain event that very recently took place while you’re free to beat that dead horses bones. Plus I’m still on moderation for……….???? So my comments come a day late and a dollar short.
    —————————————–
    @Molly Ren & mediumdave & kirbywarp
    “BTW, Mr. Nolan’s math is a bit off… 77 suicides per week would be just over 4000 per year.”

    This mocking sentiment covers all your comments. How horrible that he’s trying to save men from suicide, what will those evil misogynists do next? My comment to Peter is; Keep up the good work!
    ———————————————
    @PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
    “What scares me is that because Mr. Nolan wants to go back to an imaginary time when Men Were Men and women were chattel, he would slaughter thousands of people who have done no more harm then to be unlike him.”

    When we look at the deaths and injuries men sustained in all history from work, war, saving women and children, and daily life in every culture, men suffer worse than women. How can that possibly translate into oppression or chattel. Men didn’t do these things by choice they did them as a responsibility to women and children.

  8. @redlocker:
    Marc is really showing his true colors.

    And this colors are? That I am a nihilistic, misanthropic, amoralistic anti-humanist? Or worse, an MRA? I’m not an MRA, I can assure you, the other allegations… yes, they’re probably true.

    As I said, I like Solanas, I’m not lying. I really like her, I read her manifesto several times.

    Sadly, though there were some really good ideas in it, it’s obvious that she was suffering from severe mental illness and loss of critical reasoning )like when she wrote that it’s the fault of men that we don’t have a cure for diseases like cancer) and that probably makes it easy to dismiss everything she wrote.

    The quote from Alice Schwarzer is really old, she said it shortly after Solanas became famous for her shooting.
    Today, of course, she would never say such a thing… feminism matured, it lost it’s honesty, we now have only these “tee-hee, horny primitive men, you’re not allowed to screw me” slutwalks and “Real men don’t rape” stuff.

    When Solanas writes: Religion not only provides the male with a goal (Heaven) and helps keep women tied to men, but offers rituals through which he can try to expiate the guilt and shame he feels at not defending himself enough against his sexual impulses; in essence, that guilt and shame he feels at being male.” we should be at least be open to the possibility that she may be simply right!

    If you read Breivik writing in his manifesto “Human males are imperfect by default as they are plagued by their biological needs. Nevertheless, screwing around outside of marriage is after all a relatively small sin compared to the huge amounts of grace I am about to generate with my martyrdom operation.” Solanas seems perfectly right!

    So, now, I said something against feminism, your pet ideology, and that makes me bad… or an MRA?
    As I said: it’s easy to play the “Defender of Common Sense” if you’re just attacking the obvious blatant nonsense of the other side… it doesn’t mean that the foundations of your ideology might not be totally irrational, too. You’re not immune from criticism, sorry!

  9. “And this colors are? That I am a nihilistic, misanthropic, amoralistic anti-humanist? Or worse, an MRA? I’m not an MRA, I can assure you, the other allegations… yes, they’re probably true.”

    One person can’t be all five?

  10. I would argue with the rest of what you’re quoting, Marc, but the Solanas quotes just don’t make sense to me out of context. You’re trying to point out that feminism has thought of men as lesser beings since they very beginning?

    Also, we’ve said multiple times on this blog that you should probably stick to picking on feminists who 1.) We actually agree represent the current state of the movement and 2.) Are currently alive. Almost everyone who comes here to critique feminism brings her up.

  11. No, MRA-ism is normative, it’s not compatible with amoralism.

    Amoralism explained by Max Stirner:
    “You start back in fright before others, because you think you see beside them the ghost of right, which, as in the Homeric combats, seems to fight as a goddess at their side, helping them. What do you do? Do you throw the spear? No, you creep around to gain the spook over to yourselves, that it may fight on your side: you woo for the ghost’s favor. Another would simply ask thus: Do I will what my opponent wills? “No!” Now then, there may fight for him a thousand devils or gods, I go at him all the same!”

    MRAs (and feminists alike) see the ghost of right on their side.

  12. So what were you trying to say with the Solanas quotes, Marc?

  13. You’re trying to point out that feminism has thought of men as lesser beings since they very beginning?

    The central question is that it might turn out, that men are lesser beings than women or women lesser beings than men. You’re not prepared to face future scientific discoveries about human nature, intelligence.

    Also, we’ve said multiple times on this blog that you should probably stick to picking on feminists who 1.) We actually agree represent the current state of the movement and 2.) Are currently alive. Almost everyone who comes here to critique feminism brings her up.

    I don’t criticize her, I admire her for her honesty!

    The problem with feminism is that you either don’t know what it is or if you clearly define it, you must hold to irrational dogmas that are not evidence-based and need to be immunized against criticism.

    For example I think the idea that you can significantly reduce rapes by “teaching men that rape is bad” is just ridiculous…

    So what were you trying to say with the Solanas quotes, Marc?

    Wasn’t that clear? I was trying to say, that Solanas thinks that all men suffer from shame because they’re ruled by their sexual impulses, she says they’re “overwhelmed by a sense of animalism and deeply ashamed of it”

    This shame and insecurity, says Solanas, gives rise to culture, science, religion and wars, they are just a way for men to cope with their shame and self-disgust.

    If you look at Breivik, how he thinks himself as “imperfect by default”, because his sexual desire as a male, and thinks that his martyrdom will absolve him for not being able to control it… well, then everything what Solanas said perfectly applies to Breivik.

  14. “I was trying to say, that Solanas thinks that all men suffer from shame because they’re ruled by their sexual impulses, she says they’re “overwhelmed by a sense of animalism and deeply ashamed of it”

    This shame and insecurity, says Solanas, gives rise to culture, science, religion and wars, they are just a way for men to cope with their shame and self-disgust.

    If you look at Breivik, how he thinks himself as “imperfect by default”, because his sexual desire as a male, and thinks that his martyrdom will absolve him for not being able to control it… well, then everything what Solanas said perfectly applies to Breivik.”

    You’re back on that trolling horse AGAIN?! Even though people have told you multiple times that they honestly don’t agree with Solanas, and that they don’t treat men like shit or wish them dead?

  15. You’re back on that trolling horse AGAIN?! Even though people have told you multiple times that they honestly don’t agree with Solanas, and that they don’t treat men like shit or wish them dead?

    Reading comprehension… you get an F!

    I know that you think that way or at least pretend it. Have I claimed anything else?

    I just said, that Solanas seems damn right on this one, how is that so difficult to understand? I try to salvage what Solanas got right with her creative yet insane mind.

  16. Well, Marc’s true colors sure are… interesting.

    “The problem with feminism is that you either don’t know what it is or if you clearly define it, you must hold to irrational dogmas that are not evidence-based and need to be immunized against criticism.”

    C’mon, Marc. You can’t make the “No one on this site understands feminism but *me*!” argument again. I don’t care if you have a peen or a vag, no one can make that claim.

    “Solanas thinks that all men suffer from shame because they’re ruled by their sexual impulses, she says they’re “overwhelmed by a sense of animalism and deeply ashamed of it”

    “This shame and insecurity, says Solanas, gives rise to culture, science, religion and wars, they are just a way for men to cope with their shame and self-disgust.

    “If you look at Breivik, how he thinks himself as ‘imperfect by default’, because his sexual desire as a male, and thinks that his martyrdom will absolve him for not being able to control it… well, then everything what Solanas said perfectly applies to Breivik.”

    Personally, I think the “all of civilization is a sublimated sex drive!” is pretty weak. (No one is allowed to like anything itself? Several prominent scientists were married–why didn’t they just stop creating after their wedding night?) But I’ll leave that for now in order to address the sexual ideals you seem to think are so important here.

    Marc, have you ever been exposed to anything sex positive? Instead of “men are ravenous beasts, women are asexual flowers”, it changes the narrative to “women can have high sex drives and enjoy sex as well as men” and “men and women can both choose to have lots of sex, a little sex, or no sex at all”.

    Lastly, I think the narrative you’re creating of “Breivik killed 70+ children just because he thought he was a sexual beast!” is horseshit. How does his statement that “men are not men anymore” even link up with this idea? He’s calling Western culture out on not being manly *enough* instead of being ashamed of his sex drive.

  17. “Reading comprehension… you get an F!

    I know that you think that way or at least pretend it. Have I claimed anything else?

    I just said, that Solanas seems damn right on this one, how is that so difficult to understand? I try to salvage what Solanas got right with her creative yet insane mind.”

    Pardon my language, but how the fuck do you know what other people think?

    And I understand what you’re saying…and I see that you’re equating THAT as a true core of feminism (it isn’t) and saying that IT is the only thing that has the Brevik person right. You’re putting words in other peoples mouths and saying that their what they’ve said.

    That is dishonest.

  18. “And I understand what you’re saying…and I see that you’re equating THAT as a true core of feminism (it isn’t) and saying that IT is the only thing that has the Brevik person right.”

    Damn, redlocker, I didn’t even get that. I can’t figure out if Marc is agreeing with feminism, thinks that this is what feminism actually is, or is trying to defend Brevik’s actions here. Maybe all three?

  19. David K. Meller

    Pecunium– @July 30, 12:43 pm

    Will you do the people on manboobz.com a big favor and stop saying that I “want women to be replaced with machines” or other such lunacy!

    In the post that you got that from, I was relating to how feminists were being so god-awful to men, and stinking up what would otherwise be welcome and healthy heterosexual relationships.

    I was outlining a likely future if feminists continue to get their way, I was NOT advocating this future!

    Men in the coming generations would have no other choice but to substitute VR or cybernetic sources for sex–and eventually ALL female companionship–over bitter, misandrist, spiteful, demeaning, and often downright vicious feminist company! This is based on projection of likely trends in today’s society, NOT a vision of personal preference, still less recommendation.

    Already, large numbers, even majorities of men are preferring video games (crude and poorly developed as they are) over companionship with women who are vapid, stupid, narcissistic, vain to the point of caricature, and often malicious and spiteful to boot, both to men and other women! The far greater attraction of “sexbots”or–further down the line–wifebots–toys that can give men everything that we men could need or want from females–with NONE of the downside, probably won’t be impossible two or three centuries from now, given the existence of Moore’s law, the theoretical possibilities offered by “quantum computing” where bytes of information can–under certain conditions–share states of 1 and 0 simultaneously, the beginnings, even today, of the growing neural networks, and other innovations which blur the boundaries between the biological and the mechanical…

    I DON’T WANT that to happen! I want (like any sane man) a world where men and women love each other, care for each other, and derive joy from each other! I WANT a world characterised by harmony, cohesiveness, and understanding between the sexes; of QUALITY, not “equality”! My post regarding women being replaced by cybernetic contrivances is what I am afraid MIGHT happen, if feminists have their way, not what I want at all! Like my post about the Anders Brevik tragedy, I fear for what may happen if people’s preferences and values in the matter of immigration, religious difference, and social dysfunction continue to be IGNORED, One way or another, people’s concerns are addressed, and problems are solved, peaceably if possible, most destructively if endlessly thwarted and frustrated! I certainly DON’T want a future of cyberwomen (with a few remaining women kept as private toys, curiosities, and slaves by those men who can afford them), That is a future that likely awaits us, however if feminists (and the men who support them) continue to have their way!

    Men will NOT consent to their own castration! We WILL and we MUST get the women we want; women whom we can love, no matter how many, over-educated, competitive, selfish,and man-hating shrikes hate us for it!

    I DON’T want a world where a future version of Anders Brevik is elected to Prime Minister of Norway, or (Heaven help us) to President of the United States because people like Norway’s more-or-less democratic socialistic government (or our GOP and Dumbercrats) failed to deal with these concerns and problems of many millions of taxpayers responsibly, and instead babbled about what “racists” we were to want to keep our neighborhoods, our States, and our countries to ourselves, and insisted that we all sit around saying that we should learn to love and welcome the invaders and sing We Shall Overcome” together!

    Even the current guilt-ridden pack of ‘sheeple’ describing the flock of Whites (both in Europe and the USA) which have grown up since WW II won’t play at being lemmings, and drown themselves all in the nearest ocean, to turn over THEIR country to strangers–and hostile strangers at that! If you served in the military, then you of all people ought to know what I mean!

    PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
    David K. Meller

  20. “Damn, redlocker, I didn’t even get that. I can’t figure out if Marc is agreeing with feminism, thinks that this is what feminism actually is, or is trying to defend Brevik’s actions here. Maybe all three?”

    That’s pretty much it, Molly.

    …Oh, I see Meller has served his usual pile of verbal diarrhea.

  21. “I was outlining a likely future if feminists continue to get their way, I was NOT advocating this future!

    Men in the coming generations would have no other choice but to substitute VR or cybernetic sources for sex–and eventually ALL female companionship–over bitter, misandrist, spiteful, demeaning, and often downright vicious feminist company! This is based on projection of likely trends in today’s society, NOT a vision of personal preference, still less recommendation.”

    Sorry, Meller, time to put on your big boy pants and accept that buck-passing ideas like this have consequences. No one is making you into a hateful pile of slease. You’re doing that to yourself.

  22. @Molly Ren:
    C’mon, Marc. You can’t make the “No one on this site understands feminism but *me*!” argument again. I don’t care if you have a peen or a vag, no one can make that claim.

    Then what IS feminism?

    @redlocker:
    And I understand what you’re saying…and I see that you’re equating THAT as a true core of feminism (it isn’t)

    No, I don’t, it isn’t the true core of feminism, absolutely not.

    and saying that IT is the only thing that has the Brevik person right. You’re putting words in other peoples mouths and saying that their what they’ve said.

    ??? I read her manifesto, I QUOTE her!

  23. Already, large numbers, even majorities of men are preferring video games (crude and poorly developed as they are) over companionship with women

    And here I thought it was because they are poorly socialized, prefer using their time to perform specific tasks for guaranteed rewards when they follow exacting measures actions and get a little “ding” when they accomplish it.

    I mean I’m no expert. (I really don’t have the time to be one) but having gamed on and off since Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A Select Start I can say video games and the formulas they follow are pretty Pavlovian.

    Where as women and relationship in general don’t hold to any black and white rules.
    Too bad the only real rule to being a feminist is “Treat women as equal human beings with unique experiences, emotions and thoughts.”
    Sadly, you seem to believe they are chest bursting aliens who prey on menz for semen and $money$.
    Fortunately, you don’t seem to think these are ideas that should be hidden and women can easily spot and avoid you.

  24. “If you served in the military, then you of all people ought to know what I mean!”

    Paging Dr. Pecunium! Paging Dr. Pecunium! You’re needed for a serious case of foot in mouth! Paging Dr. Pecunium!

  25. David K. Meller, me and some other feminists have discussed the possibility of being replaced by robots.

    We too have decided that this is not the best possible future.

    Only a future in which we can have ROBOTIC SEX DRAGONS is the best possible future.

    CONDOMS AND WD-40!!!!!

    Molly “The Hammerin’ Hippo” Ren

  26. “No, I don’t, it isn’t the true core of feminism, absolutely not.”

    Then what was your past trollery about how men should be wiped out of existence about?

    “?? I read her manifesto, I QUOTE her!”

    Yes, you have read it…yet you seem to put that up as “honest femenism” while dismissing the opinions of other feminists who state that they are as far from Solanas as they can get. Earlier you stated, “I don’t criticize her, I admire her for her honesty!” Impling that Valerie was an honest feminist with good ideas while everyone else is…what, lying? Why would a member of a marginalized people have any reason to lie about not treating a member of a majority like shit?

    Civil Rights is not a puzzle of politics, it is shivel that gets at the fundamentals of individual rights. Detractors imagine it to be little more than oppression olympics or some exercise in power, when really Civil Rights is about individuals getting the right to participate in the world, no matter their biology. That you construct it as some zero-sum game says a lot about you and nothing about Civil Rights itself.

  27. @cynickal: To be fair, I’m a video game person (of the old school/retro kind, though), and even I realize that games are just games, not a means to an end. That Meller thinks that they are a replacement for human interaction…well, he should speak for himself, frankly.

  28. Meller: Men will NOT consent to their own castration! We WILL and we MUST get the women we want;

    Nonsense. The women you want are as actually castrated as you think men are for not being able to bullyrag them, and own them (coverture, et sequalam legium).

    If you served in the military, then you of all people ought to know what I mean!

    This… makes no sense. I mean it. I can parse the rest of of that farrago of non-sense (because the future you see as inevitable, isn’t), but this blathering non-sequitor about lemmings and strangers and my being in the Army… is gibberish.

  29. Meller – “I WANT a world characterised by harmony, cohesiveness, and understanding between the sexes; of QUALITY, not ‘equality’!”

    Your entire rant was somewhat disconcerting, but this part especially stuck with me. It seems as if you honestly think that men everywhere are finding it impossible to coexist with a significant other who is a *gasp* feminist. However, everywhere I look I see people who are happy and in healthy relationships. Regardless of the relative happiness of various strangers in the world, I guess my question for you is what makes you think you will be able to form a relationship of “harmony, cohesiveness, and understanding” between even one woman if you do not see her as your equal? You, and various other commentators on this site, say things about how unfair feminism is to men or how men are looked down upon or that the laws unfairly burden men more than women, and these arguments are the crux of your arguments against feminism and the reason you state that violence by men is inevitable because men can’t be expected to deal with that for much longer…but then in the same rant you seem to advocate for a position where women would be treated poorly by the law, would be looked down upon by society, etc. Does it not occur to you that maybe women might dislike being treated like sub-humans as well? Personally, I would never be friends with someone, let alone in a romantic relationship, who considered me beneath him or of lesser importance than him. I don’t think any person would. I do expect my relationships to be based on equality. To me, this doesn’t necessarily mean that I can do everything he can do (for instance, I readily accept the fact that because he went to culinary school, his cooking is WAY BETTER than mine), but that our contributions to our relationship and home are equally important.

    Also, I find it really interesting that because you consider immigration to be bad (and because the manifesto of one lone terrorist stated that his actions were because of immigration), you seem to think that means that the majority of people agree with you. It seems to me that if the majority of people wanted immigration completely closed off, our elected officials would at least be considering something along those lines in order to appeal to their voters when election time rolls around. However, I highly doubt that the manifesto of a terrorist speaks represents the thoughts and beliefs of the majority of his country.

  30. Nonsense. The women you want are as actually castrated as you think men are for not being able to bullyrag them, and own them (coverture, et sequalam legium).

    QFT!!

  31. I WANT a world characterised by harmony, cohesiveness, and understanding between the sexes; of QUALITY, not “equality”!

    So, then, “quality” and “equality” are mutually exclusive terms?

    You WANT a world characterised by the subordination and subjugation of women in the best interests of men ONLY.
    And what eventually grew out of that type of world? Feminism, that’s what. Most, if not all, things don’t just occur in a vaccuum, and neither did Feminism.

  32. David k. Meller

    I have NO idea where the f**k this is going! I certainly extended the olive branch here, with no results! I needa drink–or at least another website!

    I need assurance that right reason still exists in the world!! I need assurance that men are still men, women are still women (G-d bless ‘em), and that feminists are regarded as Satan’s own freak show!

    You people (“women” and “men” alike) on manboobz, have given me a new appreciation of the existence of sheer lunacy in our society! From now on, when I read Press releases from President Obama–or listen to speeches from the likes of Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, or Nancy Pelosi, I will think “there, by the grace of G-d, I could be viewing manboobz com!

    Compared with you all, even Presidential aspirants of the Stupid Party (the GOP) and the even goofier counterparts of the Dumbercrats–are luminous models of rationality, good humor, and self-responsibility!

    Power to the People, Comrades!! Don’t forget those red armbands, or you won’t be allowed in Party Headquarters for the workers and peasant’s (and womynz) meeting tonight.

  33. Do you also need assurance that small furry creatures form alpha centauri are real small furry creatures from alpha centauri?

  34. Nobby wins the internet.

  35. Keller – if this blog (and the people who frequent it) bother you so much, then why come here? You certainly aren’t here to challenge yourself or you beliefs, so it seems that you come here merely to piss yourself off (or attempt to piss us off). If we all bother you so very much that you wish you were listening to Sarah Palin give a press conference, by all means, stop subjecting yourself to this torture.

  36. Meller, you extended the olive branch to us?

    Do you know what an olive branch is?

  37. men are crazy. and when they go crazy, people usually end up dying.

    this is hilarious though. i love his obsession with sex and the city. like that’s the reason he’s a loser.

    i call the “MRA” the LRA–losers’ rights activists. it’s a bunch of failed men who simply cannot believe that they didn’t get what they want in life. so they do the time-honored male tradition of blaming women for their failures (check out the adam and eve story for a primer).

    why are men so crazy and so sensitive? and why aren’t more news media outlets reporting on this in that context?

  38. No, men aren’t crazy. And crazy isn’t synonymous with violent. Some men have deeply fucked up ways of looking at the world and women; combine that with a sense of bruised entitlement and you often see them lashing out, verbally or physically. There’s a strong undercurrent of violent talk on MRA message boards; I only hope that it stays just talk, but I don’t think we’ll be that lucky.

  39. Es una visión extremista y sesgada, sin embargo eso no le resta razón a muchos de sus puntos, aunque no sean tan absolutos y generales como él maneja.

    Uno de los puntos que más comparto, es la tendencia del feminismo que lleva a la absurda situación de que los hombres (principales contribuyentes) esten financiando al estado para que tengan los recursos para substituir a ellos mismos de sus funciones como esposo; darle toda la libertad y ventajas a las mujeres sin que ellos (los hombres) reciban nada a cambio por su trabajo, protección y el servicio que les estan prestando.

    Desde mi punto de vista el problema numero 1 es que el estado intervenga en la vida privada de las personas, no creo que tenga derecho a eso. Pero si tuviera que aceptar que el estado no va a respetar esto y se va a meter con la vida de las personas; abogaría sin duda a leyes discriminatorias pero en sentido contrario, encaminadas a lo que él dice, para restaurar el patriarcado que comparto que es el sistema más natural, armonicó con la naturaleza, estable, justo y conveniente.

  40. @Jackie
    “men are crazy. and when they go crazy, people usually end up dying.”

    Alright Jackie since you opened your yip let me help you jam your foot all the way in .
    First what you say is a sexist statement. The blanket statement men are crazy makes me wonder if your not a tad touched yourself. I could reply with “women are crazy” but that would be wrong as well and just as bad as your orginal statement.
    So lets look at some facts and I just know your going to hate them but what the heck you made the statement so put your bib on dear and get ready for a mouthful of toe-jam.
    From:
    Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2010). Results from the 2009
    National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Mental Health Findings
    Past year SMI ( serious mental illness) was more likely among women aged 18 or older than among men in that age group (6.4 vs. 3.2 percent).

    Among adults aged 18 or older, the percentage having any mental illness in the past year was
    significantly higher among women than among men (23.8 vs. 15.6 percent).

    Get it Jackie ? Women are twice as likely to have serious mental illness than men and about 1/3 more likely to have any mental illness.
    So either your delusional (and part of that 6.4% ) or your just ignorant either way you need to bone up a little before you open your mouth and you get another taste of your toe-jam.
    Do I really need to have a peek at female spree killers? yah sure why not

    Brenda Spencer: On January 29, 1979, Brenda, then 16, used a .22 rifle and fired at the staff and students of an elementary school across the street on which she lived, killing two and wounding nine
    Amy Bishop: Shot six colleagues, three of which died, with a 9mm handgun February 13, 2010 shortly after learning that she had been denied tenure. She was arrested and indicted for the shooting and is currently in custody. The authorities also reopened the case of her fatally shooting her brother years earlier
    Jennifer San Marco: Killed a neighbor, then went to a mail processing plant, where she killed an additional six before shooting herself in the head on January 30, 2006
    Sylvia Seegrist: On October 30, 1985, she opened fire at a Springfield, Pennsylvania shopping mall, killing three people and wounding seven others.
    From : http://criminalminds.wikia.com/wiki/Spree_Killer#Female_Spree_Killers
    Now here is something interesting taken from:

    http://www.victimsofviolence.on.ca/rev2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=362&Itemid=52

    “Although males make up the majority of serial killers, there are female serial killers as well and they differ from men in many ways. Research shows that the majority of males (50%) kill for sexual pleasure while females kill for profit (75%), control (13%), or revenge (12%). Men tend to be more actively violent in their killing, raping, torturing, beating or strangling their victims while females are usually passive and tend to favour poison. The victimologies differ as well; men tend to chose strangers while women target relatives, friends, and romantic partners. One of the most suprising differences is the length of time over which each gender continues killing. Men usually kill for a short period, a few months to about 4 years. Women, on the other hand, kill for an average of 6-8 years, sometimes even decades.”
    The part I find particularly chilling is the last part about women killing relatives etc and as well that they kill over longer periods of time. Then there is the methodologies, see women like to poison more then men which can lead to a murder being classified as natural causes and if you want the data on that you’ll have to get offa yur hinnie and ask permission from mommy or daddy to do research so you can make an educated comment.
    It is blanket statements like yours that really just adds to the confusion and hate of an enumerated group.
    Yes he was a sick individual, yes he did heinous acts ( my heart goes out to the victim’s families) but you making the blanket sexist statement was deplorable and you should be ashamed of it but somehow I don’t think you will. Good thing there is hard facts and data to disprove you.

  41. I happened to have read the manifesto and I (a female) and disgusted that the author of this article took the part about females completing out of context and therefore missed the entire meaning of the book. There is so much in the book that is the result of years of research and it has loads of useful and intelligent information. I do not support Brevik’s method because it was counter productive and he choose the wrong target ( a group of young people who were at a pro-palestinian rally being brain washed by the left wing liberal Norwegian government who sponsored the “summer camp”. This type of censorship was partly what lead to Brevik’s decision to kill those “kids”.) He should have targeted the communists/socialists/progressives inside and outside of government who are destroying the youth and the country of Norway.

  42. maria de lourdes

    haha,where are those so igualitarian scandinavian countries,where women have respect and freedom???Europeans and americans love to say Latin America is full filled with sexism and misoginistic men,now,what do you say about that???

    That still reigns in the industrialized countries,not only in the lands of “fanatic terrorists”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,701 other followers

%d bloggers like this: