Over on the always repugnant In Mala Fide, a guest blogger by the name of What is To Be Done recently offered his comrades in the “anti-establishment / man/ biorealist / HBD/ reactionary / racist / patriarch / tradcon / whatever blogosphere” what he evidently sees as a revolutionary suggestion: instead of trying to fight the evil feminists with “well-reasoned arguments,” why not simply set up fake feminist blogs, and post shit on them to make feminists looks bad?
WITBD explained:
On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a saboteur. We are naturally smarter than the feminists (in fact, objectively better in every conceivable way), and in addition, we are well-trained in deception by our studies of game. In other words, it’ll be a piece of cake for us to mimic their arguments and appear to them as really smart girls who really know their shit.
Really? Because no one I’ve ever run across in the manosphere has managed to pull off a particularly convincing impersonation of a really smart anything. And in order to effectively parody something, you have to actually understand it first. Given some of the truly odd things MRAs and manospherians believe about feminism and feminists – see my post on Operation Alimony yesterday for one recent example — I’m somehow thinking that the only people dumb enough to be fooled by these “false-flag-feminist” blogs will be other, yep, MRAs and manosphereians.
Nonetheless, WITBD claimed that’s he’s already started putting his little plan into action:
I have already begun false flag blogging myself. At this stage, giving the link would ruin the whole thing. But it’s out there. And “false flag blogging” returned only 87 results, of which only a few actually seemed to discuss what I’m talking about, so for the time being it seems nobody is watching out for it. Not that they’d be able to tell anyway.
His fantasies got more and more extravagant:
Think long term. The endgame is to build a big enough presence that coming out as a fake feminist generates buzz in and of itself. Imagine if it came out that the founder of Feministing was actually a men’s rights activist.
And that he could fly, and shoot lasers from his eyes! Imagination is fun!
(Note: The founder of Feministing is not actually an MRA, or a man. Nor can she fly or shoot lasers from her eyes.)
WITBD continued fantasizing:
Eventually, our false flag bloggers will coordinate with our legitimate bloggers and have “debates” where both sides are controlled by us.
And where the only people paying attention are you guys.
If you feel you are getting really good at this, attack some prominent feminists for not being feminist enough. I don’t even know what that would mean, but, hey, this is feminism. Nonsense is our bread and butter.
Wheels within wheels!
Some on In Mala Fide thought this was a dandy idea. Frost wrote:
Fuck yeah. Awesome post. …
[W]e need to get bold and creative with how we fight the war for the best minds in the western world. False flag blogging is a wide-open front. Especially if you’re new to writing and aren’t yet confident in your voice – and unless you have written many thousands of words already, the truth is your writing is probably going to suck – a false-flag blog would be a great way to hone your skills while only having to actually write at the level of typical mid-twenties gender studies grad student.
Here’s a post of mine that sadly didn’t get a lot of attention, but it’s one of my own personal favourites:
http://www.freedomtwentyfive.com/2011/08/an-open-letter-to-the-manginas-of-the-internet/
I submitted it to The Good Men project, Manboobz, and a few other Mangina sites as a guest post, but sadly no one bit. These people are just so easy to parody, it’s ridiculous.
Regular Man Boobz readers may have a rather different assessment of how effective his parody was.
Others on In Mala Fide were a bit more skeptical of the “false-flag” idea. As out-and-proud racist thwak put it:
It sounds like a good idea, but it won’t work. Its been tried by white people on counter racism forums and they always got busted. We used to call it the “nigger impersonation syndrome”.
A white person would sign up with a name like “Jamal” and speak ebonics… but they always got busted cause at some point they hafta come out of “nigger cloak” to practice racism; i.e, say and/or do something a black person would not say/do.
Sure, they have the option of coming on the discussion board and pretending to be a full time nigger, but how does that advance the racist agenda? …
The “black White Supremacist” stuck out like a nun in a whore house everytime.
And got busted everytime.
Gosh, it’s almost as if black people are actual human beings and not just racist caricatures. And that real black people can somehow magically spot the difference between other real black people and racist assholes posting in “ebonics.”
Huh. Could the same happen with feminists?
In a followup post, WITBD dismissed the critics as uncreative cowards. And it turns out that fake blogs are only the starting point in his grand plan.
The fact is we are not the alt-right. We are the new left. We are the oppressed proles … They are the establishment. We lost “our” country. They control it all now. We have blogs. And a handful of churches and seasteading. Sucks.
Now it’s time to move on. We have to take these pieces of shit down and that means we must use leftist tactics. This kind of blogging operation is the beginning of a long march to infiltrate and undermine their institutions.
Sounds like someone has been reading Mao’s Little Red Book!
Playing around? Real men fight to win, period. We fight feminism specifically because it’s the weak point of liberalism. Read your Sun Tzu. Attacking the entire rainbow coalition at once is madness. You always attack the enemy where he is weakest.
And the weakest links are the ladies, naturally.
[N]ot all women actually benefit from feminism. They may think they win at first, but we know full well that feminist sex and the city-type women lose big time: no kids, no committed alpha, no nothing. Most women don’t benefit, and many women are recognizing this.
Right now among women, feminism is high status and actually being feminine is low status. But all women instinctively want to actually be feminine, and they have better life results when they do. We all know about how to manipulate women’s idea of status. This should be easy to work out.
If we take out or marginally disrupt feminism, and pull lots of white women out of the coalition, it crumbles in short order.
Oh no! Not the white women! Don’t take the white women!
High-IQ thundercunts are major war engines of the regime, and especially the childless ones. They actually run the agencies, corporations, HR departments, universities, etc. Without them, the enemy has a harder time operating. As well, white women are blatantly used as bait to recruit minority men into liberal groups.
Anti-feminism is something that we know well … and it is something that the other elements of the liberal coalition actually somewhat agree with us on because its not like the blacks, Mexicans, Arabs etc. are keen on empowering their women. All men of all races have common ground in dealing with the unique female brand of bullshit and thus are potential sympathizers on this issue.
So this is his grand plan: for racist white dudes like him (and much of In Mala Fide’s readership) to build a sort of antifeminist rainbow coalition with “blacks, Mexicans, Arabs, etc” … in order to take down feminism … in order to weaken liberalism … in order to screw over the “blacks, Mexicans, Arabs, etc.”
Yeah, that’s totally gonna work.
Pecunium – Actually, I do have old friends in the Transhumanist LIbertarian Contigent of The Future, so it’s possible I AM a few degrees off from Yudkowsky. I kinda don’t wanna know if I am.
@Pecunium
The women who had boys castrated for their amusment.
NWO, every time I think I’ve seen the extent of your colossal stupidity and ignorance, you manage to surprise. What, are you now disputing the existence of the neuter gender in a language you don’t even know because there aren’t any “neuter people”? It’s like saying all of calculus is wrong because you personally have never seen a loaf of bread sliced into an infinite number of slices. Like it or not, the Russian grammar has a neuter gender; it applies to certain objects and abstract ideas. Lots of languages have the neuter gender, most notably classical Latin.
@Pecunium
Ohh!
Okay, I understand what you meant! Now I feel silly for misunderstanding. Thank you for clarifying 🙂
That’s true (I think the only exception I remember are nations, which are gendered female?)
Oh well, it’s a good(?) thing that NWO is unlikely to attempt to learn a second language – it would probably make his head explode.
@Pecunium
“Citation needed. You have no idea of my actual “ideology”, because you don’t pay attention. You can’t even separate the technical aspects of language from your ideology (which is, Man good, Woman bad).”
I place blame where it belongs. No one gets a free pass because they’re born “woman” You however exempt all women from any wrong doing.
In the game of “equals.” Equal accountability, (blame) must be given as well. Feminism is women are always victims. Where theres a victim, theres an oppressor. It’s either man or patriarchy.
but NWOSLAVE, where is your evidence that the eunuchs were castrated “for their amusement?” Period documentation of giggling concubines? ANYTHING?
What’s the amusement when a man can’t fuck?
Where theres a victim, theres an oppressor. It’s either man or patriarchy.
…
Or, you know, leaving aside the big word Kyriarchy for ya, lets just go with … The State. I can still say the State oppresses, right? Or are you saying that you can’t say that yourself, because it would make people into victims?
@Pecunium: OMG so jelus. Have fun at the Daily Show taping. Someday I want to go there.
And Colbert too.
We just have to fly to New York, ahahahahahaha.
I want to hear all about it.
@Amused
And that’s a language. An object or an action can be neuter. A person isn’t.
The women who had boys castrated for their amusment.
What’s the amusement when a man can’t fuck?
=..
The women’s amusement came from putting on their pretty concubine clothes and wiggling it just a little bit in front of the just-about-to-be eunuchs so they could bring the axe down, I guess.
NWO: in English, we call babies “it” all the time–conversationally.
But anyway, here, just for you, is a LINGUISTICS site (NOt Wikipedia) for you about what the definition of grammatical gender is:
http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsGrammaticalGender.htm
@ithiliana
Good luck with your paper!
Also, in german your glass would be neuter, while the coke would be female. There has been a big discourse going on whether Nutella is gendered female or neuter, though. GRAMMATICAL GENDER IS SERIOUS BUSINESS!WHERE IS PROOF CONCUBINES HAD MEN CASTRATED FOR THEIR AMUSEMENT. PROVIDE PROOF. I THREW IN THAT SOME OF THEIR MOMS HAD THEM CASTRATED. I THEREFORE, BY DEFINITION, SAY NOT ALL WOMEN BLAMELESS. BUT STILL SAY YOUR GIGGLY GIRLS THEORY FULL OF SHIT.
Throw down, NWO, throw down.
@zhinxy:
That’s another thing. NWO has previously told us that women get off by dressing up in skimpy burqua’s and tempting men, then denying them orgasms in our vaginas. But that wouldn’t work with a eunuch. So how exactly do you amuse yourself with a man who can’t get aroused? Color me puzzled.
@zhinxy
Ooooooo! That’s right the recently arrive Kyriarchy and zie need to be thrown in the mix. You seem so smart now!
Only women are victims. Let’s not stray too far from ideology. Remember, white male privilege. It real!
The fact that he can’t get the boner is joy enough?
@NWO: So why exactly are you claiming that the Russian language has no neuter gender?
It’s believed that castration does not necessarily remove all sexual function from all men. Certainly, it will not prevent other expressions of sexuality apart from PIV intercourse. What it will do is render a man incapable of reproduction. Which is why it was practiced on men who maintained and oversaw harems.
The women in the harems and the castrated men who watched over them were just different kinds of slaves though neither had a right to bodily autonomy. I seriously doubt that the modern concept of bodily autonomy even existed.
But it wasn’t about giggling concubines and “play things” anymore than it was evil, mustache-twirling men.
@Amused
“That’s another thing. NWO has previously told us that women get off by dressing up in skimpy burqua’s and tempting men, then denying them orgasms in our vaginas. But that wouldn’t work with a eunuch. So how exactly do you amuse yourself with a man who can’t get aroused? Color me puzzled.”
You tell me dearie! Since you’re a woman and I’m a man we don’t think the same. Is it funny that those castrated boys couldn’t get off? Teehee!
It is. So is class privelege, white privelege, religious privelege, state privelege, all of which women can wield. For instance, as a white male, you do have certain priveleges. You’re also trained by those priveleged over you in the matters of class and state to scrap and fight at the heels of other people just trying to get a leg up in a broken State system by being told they’re getting special priveleges. Just a crazy theory.
Jesus F. Christ, it’s like arguing with a parrot!
Is it funny that those castrated boys couldn’t get off? Teehee!
…
No, it’s fucking not. It’s horrible.
Just tell us why, AS A MAN, WITH YOUR MAN BRAIN, you THINK we would find it funny?
@Amused
I know, right?
I thought he said that it’s worse then rape when women arouse men without putting out – so, didn’t those concubines actually do the eunuchs a favour? I don’t get it.
No, NWO, castration is not funny to me. You, on the other hand, are hilarious. I’d say you’d provide fine entertainment in a harem. Of course, its owner — a man, of course — would insist that you get snipped first.