On Woman’s Hour on Wednesday feminists Rebecca Asher and Jack Urwin were discussing their respective books both called Manning Up. While we know that feminists are forever finding new territories to conquer, Asher’s land grab sounds truly cynical. She has joined the movement within feminism that labels masculinity as ‘toxic’ and which attempts to pathologise, appropriate and control  what it means to be a boy or man.

It is finally coming to feminists’ attention that boys do much worse at school, that men are much more likely to commit suicide, die, end up homeless or in prison. Thanks to the commitment of men’s rights activists, the knowledge of male disadvantage is  finally penetrating the public domain.

However, instead of using this knowledge to question their own beliefs, feminists are bending and twisting and incorporating this  knowledge into their own narrative to ensure that their utterly toxic, even cancerous (thanks Milo) ideology, remains intact.

According to feminists, male disadvantage simply shows that men too are victims of this ‘hegemonic’ masculinity. We must, according to Rebecca Asher, get rid of this masculinity which afflicts us all. Incidentally, she claims she would like to get rid of femininity too. In her world in order to become people we need to be robbed of what it means to be women and men.

Listen up, you evil harridans. There is nothing toxic about masculinity. It is masculinity that protected women and their children from birth through to old age. To this day, it is women who have the benefit of a husband who are much more likely not only to have the financial support that comes from having a provider, but more likely to have better paid work and children very much more likely to thrive. All this comes from men feeling responsible for their women and children. This is the bread and butter of masculinity. And the utterly hidden part of the equation is the way in which feminists benefit from men.

This gets to the heart of why men suffer. They protect us, provide for us. Chameleon-like they adapt themselves and their way of life to fit in with prevalent feminist desires and whims. Yet there is no acknowledgement, let alone recognition, value or worth attached to what they do.

It is not masculinity that is toxic. Feminists are the parasites, getting fat on the goodwill, tolerance and indeed chivalry of men and then denying them, thus suffocating the source of their food.

Feminists like Rebecca Asher and Jack Urwin complain about men’s stiff upper lip. But it is precisely men’s ability to put aside their own self-interest without murmur and bow to the will of women without complaint that initially allowed feminism to thrive.

For their part, feminists have ruthlessly exploited femininity to plead for safe spaces and trigger warnings, special conditions and advantages. Rebecca Asher may be keen to kill off femininity but without it feminism would never survive.

When feminists say they want to get rid of masculinity and femininity, the truth is that they want to convert us all to a feminist female perspective. They are completely blind to the extent to which their own perspective is completely blind to an alternative masculine point of view.

Rebecca Asher says that men hold all the cards and structure the world. This is nonsense. It is women as grandmothers, aunts and mothers who structured the world so that men supported them and their children. And where men did so, families thrived. When men gave women control over their own fertility, through the Pill, women set about restructuring the world of work and family. Men, ever loyal and conditioned to support and protect women, initially supported them in their aims.

The fact that Rebecca Asher can write a book about men and masculinity and at the end of it say they hold all the cards suggests she didn’t listen to a word that men say.

Fortunately, masculinity evolved to protect women and children. While initially men supported feminism, they have long recognised that it is harming women and children. Feminism will not survive this. Masculine men, not those who dress in women’s clothes, will fight back.


  1. Masculinity is toxic now?

    Good grief. Where did I go wrong?

    Is must be all that testoxerone in my system!

    Where do I go to hand in my goolies?

  2. I’m not so sure about your final paragraph, Belinda. Recent trends seem to suggest that rather than fighting back, men are leaving the arena altogether.

    Marriage is just about over in the white working class (while still healthy in the middle class and immigrant communities). White working class women are largely left to fend for themselves or to marry the state.

    I’m in my fifties now and all the working class women I knew when younger never married and all but two are childless (and none of them seem to understand why).

    Men are (mostly) rational and with the legal system so stacked against them and with traditional marriage no longer available anyway, it’s no wonder that so many have left the stage.

    Feminism has been incredibly successful at destroying the relationship between men and women, the sad irony of it is that it is the working class – those that the Marxists claim to champion – who have been most adversely affected.

    • All information is that working class is the most socially conservative . with simple aspirations that have fallen apart. Increasingly labour is losing its grip as it can only offer more dis integration. a real opportunity if the conservatives can get out of the Westminster Village /London elite and offer an alternative way out of the mire.
      Of course the cultural Marxist theory is that the mire engulfs all, so their work appears to have reinforced the bourgeoisie!

    • Your comment struck a nerve with me, as I’ve seen this dynamic from the other side. I used to belong to a hunting club here in the Midwest US. At the time there were about 25 men between the ages of 25 and 50 who were members. Only 2 that I know of were ever married. They were also divorced. These were all working class, blue collar guys, most were in trades. A few years ago we had some women who wanted to join and since we couldn’t legally refuse, we admitted them. Over the course of the next few months more women joined, most of them were working class, hair dressers, nurses aides and such. It took very little time for the men to completely disappear. The active membership of the club is now exclusively women. I kept showing up for a little while so as not to appear sexist. I’d always get the question, “Where are all the men?” I never did have a satisfactory answer. To use a an English expression: It’s like someone put up a very light and everyone ran for their dugouts.
      I don’t think these guys were part of some organized movement. I think they just decided their lives were easier and less risky without women around. You’re right and the author is wrong. The masculine men won’t fight they’ll just dig their dugouts deeper.

      • With today’s system how could any woman past childbearing years even think that any man would want to risk his entire lifes gains on the chance for a fleeting trainwreck of a relationship. I see similar scenarios repeating throughout society – women move in, not because they want to do the activity but because men are there. Now many Churches are mostly women and the men steer clear.

        • In the case of our club, the women voted en mass to sell the hunting land we had all pooled our resources to purchase. They split the profits among the ACTIVE members. To my knowledge, not a single male member ever received a check. It really is the perfect metaphor for society at large. What I find amazing, is the complete lack of awareness it takes to ask the question, “Where are all the men?”

          • Not one pf them had a conscience. You are so right – men work and build up – women steal and destroy.

  3. Men have been spoon fed this feminist crap for decades, well there is now a growing pushback against the media and academic brainwashing of denigrating masculinity. Women have monopolised this victim complex, pleading they are delicate babes in the woods, when in fact feminists are manipulating and distorting facts and information along with the help of the pro feminist media.

    Actually alot of men are now so tired and sick of all this constant negative portrayal of their own sex and masculinity they have turned their backs on women all together, and who can blame them. Speak to any man who has had a sh*tty deal via the divorce courts and been ostracised from his own kids. Advice to all men, keep your money, watch porn, and to hell with leeching women.

  4. One may argue about the causes but, as you say the truth is men in general are very unlikely to prioritise “their” interests. Its important that men can see that the things that they should address benefit more than themselves. However in truth I think it is vital that women speak up. It seems to me the same dynamic that you have described will hold true, if women’s voices are loud in support of men then their default will be to support them. Currently the success of feminists is to have been loud enough to have appeared to be the voice of all women. Thus men have done their bidding, at least in the policy/public spheres.
    It is now largely forgotten that much of the “patriarchy” , such as laws making husbands responsible for wives debts, excluding women from dangerous jobs, etc. Are in fact 19th Century and responded to the demands of women’s societies of the time, who wanted women protected from the excesses of the industrial revolution. Of course it was enacted by men keen to be doing the right thing. It is easy to forget what a social convulsion the industrial revolution was. Huge new cities appeared from tiny villages.
    It may be unpalatable but the real “battle” is between women.

    • And so long as the supposed mass of sensible women (?) refuse to vociferously fight on behalf of men against their deluded “sisters” then the chasm can only widen, daily. The female sex will suffer most.

      Your dilemma Belinda is how you make 21st Century narcissistic entitled ‘princesses’ care about men? I have no idea.

      I do know that most masculine men will not “fight back” on your behalf anymore – can you blame them? The cavalry are NOT coming.

      • I agree completely. Non-feminazi women must stand up and be counted against the feminists. You must argue for changes in family law that are heavily biased against men. You must attack this PC rubbish at every opportunity.
        Women have legal equality, they have a vote, and with that comes a responsibility to preserve real equality. Start running for testicular cancer rather than just breast cancer, fight for an education system that doesn’t emasculate boys, etc.

        We are not going to do this for you. Grow up.

        I do realise it’s hard. I’ve worked in almost entirely female environments, and women are absolutely loath to argue in public with other women. Well, not arguing is leading the UK to ruin. You now have no other option.

        Not only are the cavalry not coming, the cavalry have left town in the other direction.

        • Men’s activists(including women) have done/doing an essential job in raising issues. However it plays the feminists game if it becomes women against men and vice versa.

          • Rarely, I disagree with you; while I appreciate the logic of your point.

            It becomes the female game if men are STILL, after over 40 years of misandric feminism, fighting on behalf of the supposed silent majority (yet to be convinced) of women who refuse to fight – but are steadfastly complicit in all the advantages that come their way. Gluttony is neither attractive nor conducive to better gender relations.

            My fight is for the rights of my sex and frankly I don’t determine my worth by my ability to provide for a 21st Century parasite. British women (plural) have not shown me anything worth fighting for. Most heterosexual masculine men range from distaste to utter disgust for the modern opposite sex.

      • “And so long as the supposed mass of sensible women (?) refuse to vociferously fight on behalf of men against their deluded “sisters” then the chasm can only widen, daily. The female sex will suffer most.”

        Exactly. I’ve said it again and again, the only people who can oppose the feminists who have control of the levers of power within the State are other women. And other women show zero sign caring about men’s equality, because it doesn’t negatively affect them.

        I’ve always said, women are selfish. If something doesn’t affect their little part of the world they care little about it. They don’t ‘do’ theoretical concepts, they do pragmatism. Thus if you affect a woman’s immediate family negatively she will move heaven and earth to fight on their behalf. Outside that immediate family, not really bothered.

        Men on the other hand ‘do’ ideology, theoretical concepts which they apply to everyone. Hence it was men who by and large pushed the equality agenda through the political process in the post war years, because they saw that it was ‘fair’, even though it would undoubtedly negatively affect them and their male family members over time.

        I think this is something hardwired into male and female psychology, probably because of something to do with evolutionary survival. A woman has relatively few children in her life thus ensuring their survival (and propagating her DNA) is all, regardless of morals and ethics. If moving from the protection of her children’s father to the protection of a wealthier/stronger man means her children have a better survival chance, then evolutionary biology dictates thats the best thing to do. The outcome is all, the ends justifies the means.

        Whereas men can propagate their DNA with ease, and father many children throughout their lives. The best way to propagate their DNA is to stay alive for as long as possible, and spread their seed far and wide. And the best way to do that is for men to create societies with rigid class systems, and codes of honour, ethics and morals, so every man knows his place and anarchy is prevented (anarchy meaning men live short and brutish lives, and have little chance to mate, spending most of their time fighting other men).

        So basically woman have a innate desire to live in the here and now, and do whatever works at this moment in time, whereas men have a more long term theoretical view. Because thats what has worked best for them over the hundreds of thousands of years of human evolution. And that is why women will never (in the broad mass of their gender) oppose feminism, because it doesn’t negatively impact them enough, and its negative effects on men are irrelevant to them.

        • Men can’t expect women to carry the whole burden of fighting back. Plenty of men have sat back and listened to strident twaddle and said nothing. They need to see this new injustice. Once men believe in a cause, they fight well. We really need women allies, but it’s cowardice to just leave the fight to good women.

          • This is a problem for all of us – and we should all fight it. Not all of us women are feminists! I love men, think masculinity is a good thing, and I encourage it in my own son. And while I understand men just not wanting to bother with women, I think they lose out in the end if they do that – but there have to be women worth marrying in the first place. Those of us with children have a responsibility to raise them to be good and decent people. Not always easy today – you have to constantly work against the popular culture that kids are immersed in.

          • I couldn’t agree more. The popular culture contains a strong element of take as much as you can get away with and that comes into play in family courts that strike me as unbalanced. I do think this is now deterring men, who’ve seen what’s happened to other men and decide it’s too big a risk. It’s sad.

          • No, men can’t expect women to carry the whole burden of fighting feminism. But the heavy lifting and initial attack have to be undertaken by women. Then men can join in support of them. But any attack on feminism by men that has no support from the broad mass of women is doomed to fail (and there’s no evidence that the broad mass of women support any attacks on feminism).

            I mean there are men attacking feminism today, and where are the women supporting them? Mostly Mens Rights activists are belittled and derided if not outright attacked. The only women supporting Mens Rights are the ones who have been negatively affected by feminism – the mothers whose sons have been let down by the educational system, the women who have seen their sons and brothers destroyed by unfair divorces, false rape allegations, that sort of thing.

            It comes back to my previous post – women don’t care about theoretical fairness in the wider world. They care about unfairness they can see in their immediate surroundings. If they have no obvious examples in their lives of how feminism has damaged men they care about, they don’t give a fig if its destroyed men they don’t care about, and they won’t support men attacking feminism one jot.

          • Yes, we’re largely in agreement. However, this site is part of women fighting back openly and actively. Most women don’t want to be called feminists because it no longer means equality. These women’s opposition is mostly quiet until it affects them, but the same can be said for many men who have been brainwashed into accepting some of this stuff.

          • Men’s opposition to feminism is a sort of anti-opposition. Everyone assumes that men should fight feminism by effectively doing what the feminists did 40,50 years ago, lots of demonstrations, protests, kicking up a public stink.

            Thats not the male way. There’s an old saying ‘Men go mad in crowds and come to their senses one by one’, and its true of male opposition to feminism. Feminism is a mass delusion that everyone has either bought into or been indoctrinated into, and the way men come to realise the delusion is individually, on their own, as a result of what life has thrown at them. And having seen the light they then reorganise their lives in light of the new information.

            Thus there never will be some mass ‘Masculinist’ movement, because the men who could make it up have already moved on. They don’t need a big movement to fight feminism, they just melt away from it. Feminism is out there stomping around looking for male castles to tilt at, and men are just melting into the undergrowth, denying them a target. Its a US forces vs Vietcong situation, and we all know how that ended up. Its just a matter of time.

          • Men can’t expect women to carry the whole burden of fighting back.
            Plenty of men have sat back and listened to strident twaddle and said


            Men haven’t sat back’, we’ve simply done what men always do, which is to accept changed conditions and new realities, made the best of it and got on with it, while few, if any, of those women now bleating that feminism has upset their apple cart made any complaint when the apples were fresh and sweet and most shouted ‘yeah, you go girl’ at each and every bite. Now that the fruit has been found to be rotten those same women are telling us that we need to grub up the trees for them and plant new ones in fresh ground.

            Once men believe in a cause, they fight well.

            A man who believes in himself says ‘we’ and not ‘they’.

            We really need women allies … ‘

            They, we, what is to be? Regardless, this is not a war we are in any danger of losing and we do not need allies. The women you think can be useful to us are merely fighting a desperate rearguard action in the vain hope of regaining a position they abandoned decades ago. There’s no going back.

            ‘ … it’s cowardice to just leave the fight to good women.

            No it isn’t, you old white knight you; it’s their fight because they brought it on, almost to a woman and with loud cheers and clenched fists punching the air. They’re our equals now, which is what they wanted, and they must sort out the mess they’ve made without our help. We have our own battles to fight and their interests are not ours.

            You sacrifice yourself for them if you wish to but do not tell me I’m a coward simply because I want none of it.

  5. Well f— me I’m glad my daughter is not growing up in your world. A classic case of an interesting and perhaps important point rammed to its crazy logical conclusion. Trumpery, if you like.

    • Err, my daughter *is* growing up in the author’s world. And I, as her father, am mindful of that and am making sure I protect her by helping see the world as it really is, rather than as feminist injustice-imaginers and grudge-inventors think it is, or think it should be.

      • *Sigh* This is why Victorian reformers founded girls’ schools and colleges, to show that those with the support and will could change the real world. Perhaps not very very much, but that they did not have to accept everything that was determined for them by others. It’s depressing that this wheel continually has to be reinvented it will be. Perhaps from surprising quarters; Asians seem to take women’s education more seriously than the rest of us, although that’s only an anecdotal observation.

        • Right. So despite girls doing better than boys at every level of education in this country, plus for example the majority of student doctors being female, you think we in the west don’t take women’s education seriously, do you? That’s an interesting perspective!

          • Correct. If at the end of it we are going to place women under the protection of strong men, then it is all for nothing.

          • You’re all over the place.

            Girls are outperforming boys in school and this means girls education isn’t taken seriously?

          • How many times do I have to repeat myself. If the outcome is merely to allow them to serve their ‘natural masters’ with a greater range of erudition, then “yes”.

          • How is it that you can know and propound who anyone’s “natural master” is, or if there indeed is one? What knowledge are you vouchsafed that we here don’t have?

          • Like I said, you’re all over the place.

            The article makes clear that in any meaningful use of the term, the natural masters are women as they are the ones who dictate the behaviour of the other.

          • I have done you the honour of reading the entire article again and I still think you, and the writer, are labouring a reasonable point to the extent of talking out of your backside. Women and feminists don’t need to have and be grateful for male protection, just as they don’t automatically need to reject it. Perhaps our disagreement is one of language rather than substance; if so, the language used by the writer is inflammatory enough.

          • So true. Cologne for next New Year’s shindig? You won’t need protection, so you tell me and if worse comes to worst, you can always say that it never would have happened under a female mayor of Cologne / female defense minister / female chancellor and that the solution is more women.

          • Actually, you’re right. Why doesn’t Germany get a big strong man to keep all the darkies in order? What could possibly go wrong? And with that, I’m out of here, byeeeeeeeeee ….

          • Girls outperform boys purely because the education system has been “reformed” to give girls an advantage.

          • All over the place indeed. Please change your name to “PiffedOffLeftistIdeologue”.

        • In developing countries there are often smaller gaps between girls performance in maths and science subjects and boys performance – this is because economic considerations play a more important role than intrinsic interests – and so the gap lessens (what I suppose you are referring to re: Asians). In developed countries with high levels of gender equality the differences in maths and science can increase because in affluent societies people have greater freedom to be guided by personal preference. In 70 percent of all countries (in PISA surveys) girls significantly outperform boys overall (maths literacy science) in 4% of countries boys significantly outperform girls. In the highest levels of achievement especially in developed countries boys significantly outperform girls – this can explain why they majority of people in top positions are male.

  6. my sis has 2 degrees, an MBA, a well paid high flier job … and has nothing but contempt for modern feminism. And if the fems dont have someone like sis (who attacks the glass ceiling on a daily basis and wins) then I think they are totally fcuked.

  7. Wow, great article. As one of those men of whom you speak who protects his family, I can confirm that when it comes to my 13 year old daughter’s learning about the world, protecting her from feminist thinking is top of the list. Fortunately she is a smart girl, and if someone tried to tell her that men and women are or should be the same, she’d tell them not to be such an idiot.

    • I am a woman, and I have been shocked and disgusted over the years by how many women treat men badly. It’s not just the feminists per se, either – feminist culture often spills over into popular culture. A lot of women out there don’t seem to view men as partners in life, or even human beings, but rather as cash machines. Horrible.

      I have a son and a daughter, both in their teens. My discussions with them include me telling my daughter to respect men and treat them well, and telling my son never to put up with disrespectful treatment from a woman. I find this more necessary than the other way around.

      • For us all. The “golden rule” respecting others as one would hope to be respected. old but a recipe for a civilised life. How sad we even have to remind people they will be “partners in life”. rather than takers.

  8. Quite recently in Amsterdam a mother & small child and their car ended up in a canal. Four ordinary men (bystanders) dived in and worked together to save the lady and her child. They got a hammer from a nearby building to smash the car window in.
    The men did not all know each other nor did the work for the emergency services.
    Because that is what men do.

    • Yes but what about the men who try to intervene in domestic disputes and end up getting stabbed and dying. Most of the time a man will assess the dangers and make the right choice like your version of the story, others the mans efforts are pointless and often dangerous.

      • I agree that judgement is important. I for instance cannot swim! discretion is the better part of valour. The incident happened in February and what impressed me was how willing those ordinary men were to take responsibility, dive into a freezing cold canal, within seconds, to help save a stranger and her child. It was their instinct as men.
        The footage is on the internet and got a bit of coverage on UK news at the time.

  9. Any society if it wishes to perpetuate itself must generate 1.1 new adults on average fo every member of that society. That is the important task which every other task done to support (unless it is recreation).
    Since only women can have babies that means 2.2 babies per woman now. In the past it meant many more than that because infant mortality was high.
    Being constantly pregnant restricted what a woman could do, and everything else was done by men. Should the women fail to reproduce or the men fail to support them that society died.
    So yes men are programmed by society to support women, and yes some women choose to abuse that support.
    I have a feeling that these women will have few children, so there will be less of them in the next generation.

    • But yes men are not the ones who defend the country, or innovate, or are the most productive. The decisive men are the ones who create the society and jobs which the yes men need to earn money and pay taxes. You only need some of the decisive men to dropout or leave before a society is moribund.
      As the UK is discovering.

      • If by “yes men” you mean men who simply do what they are told I agree with you as far as that goes.
        I would submit that normal men see for themselves what is needed and act (and speak) accordingly.
        Normal men in my view support women and children, but take orders from neither and weigh all advice for themselves.

        • Normal men no longer desire to support a system that is so corrupt that any support given now is a furthering for future troubles – Men are going MGTOW or, not even knowing of it, are instinctively disengaging. Either things change or things die.

  10. Excellent article Belinda!! However I am not quite so confident as you that masculinity will see off the Feminist menace. Sadly I believe that the agent of Feminisms destruction will be the even worse problem i.e the rise of Islam

  11. Not likely, most men are going MGTOW these days women will have to fight for themselves…good luck!

    • Tim, you’re right that some men are undoubtedly staying clear of relationships. But there are plenty of good women who disapprove of the tactics of the opportunists, supported by an unbalanced system. Men need to take care and protect their assets but I wonder how many will be truly happy if they just give up.

      • You apparently are not fully understanding the problem – with the wrong woman you do not have the glass half full story – you get the entire dinnerware set has gone, by force of law, to her house – men get to enjoy drinking out of a tin can. The problem for the good women is that they never stood up when it mattered but took what they could get from feminism. Now they are learning that they lost trust, that is not easily recovered.

        • Yes, the system is unfair and it’s putting men off. I just don’t think all women (or men) are the same.

  12. If men hold all the cards, they’re not arranging things very well for themselves.

    I wonder what would happen if this country were under threat from another power? Would the mad feminists suddenly decide that masculinity had its uses? I don’t see the privileged-sister feminists defending anyone but themselves. Gender studies doesn’t cut much ice outside of their fantasy world.

    Masculinity and femininity can be used for good or bad. A few weeks ago on the way to the bank, I saw a young man in an argument with his girlfriend and he began dragging her along the street. There were lots of people about, mostly women, and they did nothing. But it was my idea of ‘masculinity’ that made me intervene and help the girl. Rebecca Asher and her ilk are useless mediocrities who should be challenged at every opportunity.

  13. Ms. Brown, you must be upset at how well the Women’s Equality Party did today. It is currently on 2.5% of the vote in London, coming close to beating Ukip.

    Feminism is a rising political force in this country.

    You are trying to turn back the clock but it won’t work.

    • You’re easily impressed by 2.5% of London luvvies. How did they do elsewhere? Feminism is no longer about equality and is silent about genuinely oppressed Pakistani girls, but frets about the number of women executives or film directors. It’s an irrelevance to most women.

    • I am not trying to turn the clock back. I am thinking about the well being of the disadvantaged, the homeless, single parents, those in prison. I am thinking about the abuse children suffer, about the unemployed and those without qualifications. You and your 2.5% are thinking about yourselves.

      • Please don’t waste time on that mischievous troll who is plaguing a number of websites. I doubt it is even female. All the comments from it are simply a wind up. Your article stands on its own merits and you have no need to defend it in the face of moronic attempts to intimidate dissent from an extremist feminist orthodoxy that does far more harm than good.

    • Dear Agony Aunt
      I am a 23 year old British Asian woman with a law degree. I often commute to our branch office and my local Imam has told me that, at 49.5 miles, this is haram if I travel without a male relative.. He also said that wearing knee length skirts or trousers is haram.
      Both my sister and I are due to visit my fathers village in Pakistan this summer. My sister also wishes to study law, but my mother says she wont make that mistake again.
      My father came from a small farming village. We have many cousins out there still , all farmers, some younger , but many are much older than me and my sister. As a lawyer I know my rights under English common law, but my parents and Imam say Sharia and the will of Allah (pbuh)out rank ”So called Kufar law”. I can deal with this, but my sister may be subject to tribal honour law.
      Please advise.
      Girdle Power: Any chance you can address the deep wrongs that you feminoids routinely ignore?

    • Ah. The Women’s Equality Party that does not have a position on a racist and sexist ideology. Talk about turkeys voting for Christmas – sorry Winter Festival.

    • It must be terrible being so oppressed that you only have the worlds biggest state funding broadcasting organisation to publicise your “equality” party while it actively tries to suppress the equivalent party for men.

    • Try putting your posts in bold – it may make people think that they have meaning.

  14. Too little, too late. Having realised the system is institutionally rigged against them men are voting with their feet.

  15. When the title of this piece says that, ‘feminism can only flourish under the protection of real men’ it signals the problem more than it realizes. It’s the so called White Knights and Manginas that give so much support and protection to feminism.

    There is an innate and/or cultural need for these men to get their validation as human (men) from the approval of women – in this case – feminists. And they’re happy to throw other men under the bus to get it – ethics be damned.

    The solution this article suggests – that men rescue women from feminism is lacking. The solution (and it is revolutionary) is for women to rescue men from feminism. This includes publicly opposing all the ‘real men’ who support and protect feminism.

    These ‘real men’ won’t know what to do if women attack them for supporting a hate movement against other men.

    • It is true that those who rule over us do seem to run scared from a shouty, aggressive type of feminism that always seems ready to pounce. It is extraordinary that an extremist lobby with little or no defined Parliamentary representation (but quite a few advocates) could achieve that, could feed its propaganda and linguistic contrivances into legislation and policy. And simply because opposition to that brings fierce denouncement from a suborned “public” narrative.

      It is laughable that extremist feminists campaign for “equality” when they are already so empowered without the inconvenience of having to be elected.

  16. I have a wife and four daughters, and my dogs have both been ‘done’. I employ another 4 women (out of a staff of seven).Until recently I had extant a mother and two aunts. Am I doomed?

  17. Superb. Right on the money. This is precisely what feminism does when it perceives a rival point of view gaining ground. It co-opts, assimilates, distorts, controls and ultimately destroys the rival perspective.

  18. While I can generally agree with this article what I will not agree to is men ‘fighting back’.

    Just a browse at the statics in pretty much any western country paints the opposite. Most specifically the U.S., Canada, and the U.K. the same things are going on. Namely this:

    Suicide is QUICKLY climbing up the ranks as the top 10 leading causes of death in all 3 countries.
    Work Related Deaths
    Testicular Cancer
    Bias Divorce courts
    Less men in higher education
    More men dropping out of High School (high school level equivalent education)
    Less men in the work place
    Less men working full time jobs
    and Marriage is on its death knells (as it should be).

    Men aren’t fighting back. In all 3 countries men are just simply walking away. Men in general have become so tired of being a universal scapegoat for every problem in the universe we are leaving nearly all walks of life. The sad thing is society at large NEEDS men. Men keep countries running through labor and self sacrifice. We do the dirty jobs women won’t do. Now there aren’t even enough men to do even that. You say men should fight back, but considering there is no real incentive to do so then there really is no point.

    Lastly, men should avoid marriage AT ALL COSTS! Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract that binds one persons income to another person’s whims. If men want to keep their assets DO NOT get married. It’s sad that’s come to this, but protecting livelihoods leaves no other options.

Comments are closed.