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.
kollege: I’m imagining some guy at a computer, face going bright red, a vein pulsing on his temple, eyes bulging, the whole shebang. Then lots of capslock FEMINAZI!!!!! RAMPANT MISANDRY!!!!!!!!! rage.
So basically, I’m expecting the usual 😛
@Lauralot: I’ve been trying to get him to answer some questions of my own for quite a while. I wouldn’t hold your breath.
@Crumbelievable: I don’t actually plan to get an answer. I just want to remind him of what a chickenshit liar he is every time he posts.
There is an option of creating your own, non-sexist company. And not all groups have the same interests, which might lead to shortage of people whom you are supposed to AA into your company, which might lead to taking employees which most definitely don’t fit your company or aren’t qualified. And I definitely do not want a job given to me through affirmative action. It just makes women look stupid and unqualified.”
In a real free market, yes. But ah, there’s the rub. Such a beast is not yet real, though I try with my ceremonies to hasten it’s coming to our plane. When people have the real opportunity to thrive, create, and make their own businesses bloom, then, ah then I become the shouter of YOU DON’T LIKE IT, MAKE YOUR OWN COMPANY!
But the current State /Corporate system is a nasty, nasty thing, and exactly where government and business begin can be very hard to sort out. As I said, much of affirmative action, social welfare, and etc is a bandaid on a puncture wound, and the people handing out jobs to a designed workforce are often there by things far different than merit.
See: http://www.mutualist.org/id4.html
The Iron Fist Behind The Invisible Hand.
There’s a problem indeed, and I’m all for bootstraps, self-reliance and MARKET FIX ALL! MARKET YEY!… But it’s not so simple. Not at all.
There should just be an auto-response programmed to message NWO every time he posts, with a friendly “You’re a chickenshit liar”.
@Shadow
“I throw the question right back at you, where the fuck is THIS utopia?!!”
We’re living it sweetheart. You’re gonna remember 2011 as the good old days. Women fucked it up from the word go. You ain’t seen nothin yet princess.
—————–
@Lauralot
What question was that princess? Why are you an idiot who parrots what you’re told? Or how could women be so stupid to blindly follow the very people in power who don’t give a shit about them?
@zhinxy
Weren’t you in the armed forces? You got there because of AA. You didn’t earn it. Your standards, as a woman were lower but your pay was equal. Wasn’t it?
Or how could women be so stupid to blindly follow the very people in power who don’t give a shit about them?
…
I keep asking the same of you. All this griping about women, women, women, government government government, and yet every time I’ve mentioned any sort of stateless solution, you can’t stand that either. Believe me, title IX and VAWA, both of which, yes I do have SOME problems with, are virtually nothing in proportion to the crap we’re all getting from above. Yet on you scream and rage, like a good little divided, conquered, distracted, pawn of demagogues.
Any man who’s sincerely concerned about the dearth of labor jobs in America today, and wishes there were more economic opportunities for men that didn’t require an advanced education, can start by discontinuing their support for the Republican and Democratic parties, both of which enforce and uphold the “race to the bottom” outsourcing of labor while enabling megacorporations to dodge their tax obligations so that the American taxpayer foots the bill. If people were really concerned about the weakening power of labor in this country, and sincerely had an interest in the health/safety/earning rights of the American worker, there would be MUCH greater interest and mobilization toward a Labor Party, or at least unionization, than there is currently.
The coolest, most macho thing going right now here in America is to intertwine corporations and government so that they work together to strip American workers of their earning and bargaining power. Naked corporate aggression rules. In fact, you have fewer rights than a corporation – it can abuse you however it likes, or bulldoze your house to build a big-box store, because it’s legally a person, and now has more rights than you. You can thank your Senate, Congress, Supreme Court, and President (which are majority male and lean center-right, by the way).
Of course, many dudebros have already decided that government or activism of any sort = elevating women above men wholesale, so I’m wasting my words. Or typing, in this case. I dunno, though. From my view over here, it just looks like people are suffering, period.
Because men do not have fingers or mouths anymore, apparently. I do not agree at all with the idea that all partnered people must always put the sexual needs of their partner above everything else, but listen. If you’re going to pretend to be all for equality, Emma, fucking pretend it. The thing about there being some “legitimate” reasons for not having sex on demand, like depression or illness, doesn’t work, of course, because a person who truly buys into the idea that xir partner must give sex on demand will diminish xir partner’s needs and feelings and capacities. “You’re always depressed! You’re always sick! You’re just pretending!”
Oooh, you know what really makes someone look stupid and unqualified? Talking about shit they KNOW NOTHING ABOUT. Affirmative action (in the US, at least) doesn’t work like you think it does. Seriously, Emma. Learn about feminism elsewhere. Learn by reading, or listening. Or hell, don’t learn, since you seem unable to grasp even the simplest feminist ideas or ideas about equality. No one here agrees with anything you say, because everything you say is bad.
Fuck yeah to that. Throw in with as many wildcat unions as you can. I’m gonna be a Wobbly soon! Yey!
Don’t assume you can call me nicknames, asshole, or I’ll start a trend of having everyone here refer to you as “poopsy.”
As for the rest of the shit in your post, stop trying to deflect me with insults and answer my damn question:
You claim that gendered aspects influence a culture, hence why we have “boy things” (blue, trucks) and “girl things” (pink, dolls). So by that logic, you must believe that the Native American cultures which had two-spirits (people who did not identify as male or female, but took on mixed roles in the community) must have been influenced by a gendered aspect other than male or female. Yes or no?
@zhinxy
Where here’s a thought dearie. Try shutting up and listening to men. The steal all mens waelth and power and give to the State while placing women in authority over men solution didn’t work out so well.
What’s the collective minds of women got in mind now? More feminism?
The coolest, most macho thing going right now here in America is to intertwine corporations and government so that they work together to strip American workers of their earning and bargaining power. Naked corporate aggression rules. In fact, you have fewer rights than a corporation – it can abuse you however it likes, or bulldoze your house to build a big-box store, because it’s legally a person, and now has more rights than you. You can thank your Senate, Congress, Supreme Court, and President (which are majority male and lean center-right, by the way).
Of course, many dudebros have already decided that government or activism of any sort = elevating women above men wholesale, so I’m wasting my words. Or typing, in this case. I dunno, though. From my view over here, it just looks like people are suffering, period.
…
This is one of those areas where the real radical edge of the left, and even the best of the right, you could say, on that odd place where we become one that ISN’T a sad, murky centricism, be it anti-or pro state, free market or socialist, is finding it’s common cause, NWO. Things way, WAY more pressing and oppressive than anything “the feminists might do”
Stop licking the boots that kick you, already.
Let me go on record to say IDGAF what any alleged “relationship expert” thinks people should or shouldn’t do sexually in a relationship. Sex is an activity between two consenting adults (sometimes, two consenting adolescents), and it is up to them and them alone to define how the activity plays out. The analogy of pick-up basketball is a good one. Your philosophy of the game might not work for me and my friends, and vice versa.
(Quick correction to my post, sometimes sex is an activity between three, or four, or more consenting persons. CONSENTING being the key word there.)
@Lauralot
You’re boring me with your here’s my analogy crap. What have women in their collective genius written into history now? The two-spirit lifestyle. I’ll bet genderqueer wasn’t a big issue in the native american community. Or has that been rewritten as well? Was their other “spirit” genderqueer?
I’m so glad you were present to write all these things down as a fact.
I guess castrated men could be considered neuters. Didn’t they used to do that to boys back in ancient China? To protect the elite women? Kinda like playtoys for those elite women. Oh how they must have giggled!
It’s very kind of you to provide new entries for the Book, sweetie-pumpkin. But in the interests of accuracy, because I do try to run a tight ship here, my downy duckling, can you name these women? What positions of power did they hold?
Look at all the women in positions of power making all kind of laws.
Can you name these women, babydoll? Again, this is for the Book. Think of your legacy, my soft little baby princeling.
@NWO
I am neither a woman nor from the US, but I’m more than happy to do a little research. Your current president is a man, your current vice president is a man. Your former president was a man, your former vice president was a man. There are three female judges to the six male judges in the SCOTUS, and the chief justice is a man. (http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx). 17 of 100 senators currently serving are women. There have been 39 female senators throughout the history of the US (http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/women_senators.htm). Now, I totally agree that this constitutes a significant majority of law makers, but my feminist overlords are watching so I’ll support you in e-mail.
@zhinxy
Where here’s a thought dearie. Try shutting up and listening to men. The steal all mens waelth and power and give to the State while placing women in authority over men solution didn’t work out so well.
What’s the collective minds of women got in mind now? More feminism?
…
I do listen to Men. Men’s wealth and power, AND women’s wealth and power were stolen by the state, and business interests.
Here is how it happened – http://www.mutualist.org/id4.html
“Placing Women In Authority over Men” – Again, why do you parrot this crap?
To the extent that feminism was able to organize and use state power, it doesn’t begin to amount to a sliver of that used by a state that cared very little about any of us. If political statist feminism is so popular and powerful WHY DID THE ERA NOT PASS????
As you said. The ones in power don’t care about us. But they love it when we think we’re “stealing each other’s jobs”
Placing Women In Authority over Men – Again, why do you parrot this crap?
Listen to THIS man –
http://c4ss.org/content/8942
Stop. Licking. The. Boot. That. Kicks. You.
Now tell me what I really think XD
p.s.
Seeing as you calling me princess puts me in the same league of the other commenters here that argue constant circles around you, I’m happy to take that as a compliment little man
*league as the other commenters
Emma: “There is an option of creating your own, non-sexist company. ”
Is there? In a completely perfect and free market then perhaps there are. But there are also barriers to entry into many markets and many areas of business that can work to prevent people from just starting their own business.
And if people are free to operate their businesses in a discriminatory way, that could just erect even more barriers to entry into the market for those discriminated against.
Answer my question, you fucking coward.
Yes, it is true that the only way to know anything at all is to experience it personally. That’s why no one reads or writes books or articles or talks to anyone about their research or travels or anything. History began when I was born, Ohio doesn’t exist because I’ve never been there, etc. Good points all, milkslave.