Radical masculist manifesto: on equal terms with radical feminists

Radical masculism: a necessity to fight back against radical feminists on level playing field

Radical masculists are needed as the male self defense army against radical feminism’s onslaught

powerful feminists overpower meek chivalrous menA few scattered men’s rights activists  meekly voice protest against a few isolated examples of feminist injustice.,  Insufficient to  neutralize a 100 year long world wide concerted organized feminist press and policy drive has used lies, manipulation, repression, police power to ruthlessly roll back constitutional rights, the Magna Carta, due process. Feminism has changed the world into a medieval nightmare of laws stacked against men.

A level playing field is a concept about fairness, not that each player has an equal chance to succeed, but that they all play by the same set of rules Level Playing Field | Wikipedia

A radical masculist manifesto

We need radical masculists who, like radical feminists, are not shy to make preposterous demands

  1. Paternity fraud and birth control lies should be felonies.  Hard to prove? Invert the burden of proof:  "Men never lie about birth control".
  2. Drinking, smoking, overeating during pregnancy should be felony reckless endangerment of a fetus.
  3. Gender quotas in prison are urgently needed to get 51% female prisoners. We recommend stricter punishment for female felons and special mercy for male criminals. Gender is socially constructed: if there are 7 times more men in jail then women, then this clear gender discrimination needs to be remedied.
  4. Domestic violence against men is 98 % underreported (Tiger WoodsBill Clinton): "Has a women ever slapped you, shoved you, thrown an object at you"?
  5. Raise men’s awareness of rape: "Have you ever said ‘Stop, I am tired", or "Not now" and the woman did not stop that exact second"? Then you are a rape victim! 3 out of 5 men have been raped and are not even aware that they were victims of a crime.
  6. An infant can not consent to eating unhealthy food. Feeding health damaging food to an overweight non-consenting infant thus is felony "child poisoning".
  7. Sexual innuendo, bantering should be protected free speech
  8. Disdainful female rejections and typical put-downs ("loser", "nerd", "small dick") create a hostile work environment and are harassment.
  9. Freedom to buy and sell sexual services should be a universal human right
  10. Like priests and psychologists, prostitutes should have the professional duty to keep their clients secret. Spilling the beans about infidelity destroys families and thus is bad for the children. The press should be held to the same secrecy standards, as it was common during President J. F. Kennedy and still is customary in France. .
  11. Find an equally offensive motto equivalent to the feminist war cry: "all men are rapists". "All women are gold diggers" is not good enough, gold digging is not a felony. Maybe "all women are bank robbers". Just re-define "bank robbery" like feminists re-defined "rape", "consent", "child", and "pedophilia".

If all this looks absurd, read below how women not only demanded but actually enacted similarly absurd laws to control, punish and financially exploit men.

Once feminists totally and terminally disavow and ban lunatics like Andrea Dworkin and Valerie Solanas, rescind all unjust anti-male laws, then radical masculism can be put on the back burner. Until then, the bad cop radical masculist is needed to support and inspire the good cop pussyfooted men’s rights movement.  You can not fight a rabid terrorist hate group with flower power or reasoned moderate argument alone. You need a counter-force using methods as forceful as the perpetrator. Another example of failure of peaceful moderation was Neville Chamberlain’s attempt to appease Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany

"Man’s rights activists": chivalrous, respectfully striving for equality and justice

Men are friendly lap-dogs who love women and don't want to hurt or imprison women.  No match for rabid radical feminists attack dogsChivalrous men, who love women, deeply concerned with women’s well being, worried about justice, fairness, and honesty, desirous of equality and harmony, verbally voice concerns about inequalities.

  1. Men’s righters are a small group of scattered men who discuss issues and don’t do political activism.
  2. Men fighting for true equality (while the feminist side unabashedly wants perks, advantages, special protection)
  3. Men complaining about serious injustice and pain like prison terms, crippling financial family court verdicts, while feminist side cannot tolerate anything and whines about minute disturbances like objectifying gaze
  4. Men are scared to be called misogynist
  5. Men are chivalrous white knights who willingly yield to women. Willing to die in the Titanic letting women take life boats first.
  6. Men are forgiving towards women, hard against men. Many men have maimed or killed other men who unjustly were accused of rape

These men’s rights pussies are no match for feminists.

A bunch of friendly lap-dogs against an organized army of vicious man hating feminist attack dogs that fight unfair. No match.

Radical feminists successfully annul constitutional rights, due process, free speech

Feminist are powerful, ruthless, deadly like dangerous murderous dogsWomen (51% of the population) fighting as a cohesive group, led by extremist man hating radical feminists. These don’t just spout lunatic fringe theories.

Rather they successfully manipulate and brainwash women and men world wide to get sexist biased man-hating laws enacted in all nations. They garner support of the UN and the mainstream press. Radical feminist success is mind boggling.

  1. Women, united, take the street and political forums, whenever they perceive their interests being slighted.
    • Women are selfish and shameless enough that millions, from the street to top level journalist root for violent life threatening felonious criminals like Lorena Bobbitt and the Politics of Hate
    • Men don’t even take the streets when Lorena Bobbitt, with impunity, cut off a sleeping man’s dick and later demanded and got an excuse from the victim she mutilated.
  2. Feminists not only demand, but actually receive special perks and special legal privileges in courts of law
  3. Feminist activists unscrupulously falsify statistics & blatantly lie and repress contrary research
  4. Feminists suppress academic research. Their ideological baggage prevents unbiased scientific research that could foster reduction of violence against women, men, and children. Diamond Rind Pizzey .
  5. Feminists, manipulate our language to re-define our vocabulary …………. for purely manipulative purposes
  6. Feminists create a police state by criminalizing normal sexuality
  7. Feminist invented a totally new crime: possession of child porn that jails almost exclusively men
  8. big_dog_little_dogFeminists let women unpunished for reckless drinking while pregnant and recklessly feeding children into life long obesity
  9. Feminists created a hostile, unjust, biased environment for males from cradle to grave,  in college *2, and *retirement 
  10. Feminist pedagogy alienate boys from kindergarten and school by forcing them into girlish behavior, study and reading patterns
  11. Feminists invent "battered woman syndrome" to legally justify pre-meditated murder.
  12. Gynocentrism (male chivalry) was the norm, not Patriarchy

    • Feminists invent patriarchy theory and overlook all the special perks woman had since the beginning of time. Women want to keep the privileges and cherry-pick equality on all other counts.

  13. Feminism is an organized gender hate crime organization.

13 thoughts on “Radical masculist manifesto: on equal terms with radical feminists”

  1. I object to points #2, 6, and 11, for the following reasons:

    #2 and #6
    This just puts power in the hands of government, which is all too willing to oppress us all. Rather than creating crimes and empowering tomorrow’s dangers to men and women alike, it would be best to give men a way out.
    If a man and a woman have a child, and the woman is adversely affecting the child, the man can require her to meet certain needs of the child (healthy food, not being poisoned, good parenting) or she must absolve him of fatherhood. Think of it as being able to sue to get out of a shitty deal.

    Overall, parenthood contracts can solve this. If, before conception, a contract can be devised, negotiated, signed, and dated such that if either parent breaches this contract, the other parent cannot be held responsible for the child in any way, shape, or form by any party.

    In the case of #11, I find that this will only make masculists look foolish. Women get away with this because most people give them leeway because they’re seen as irrational. On average, a woman is allowed to get away with much more bullshit than a man, as a man is expected to be reasonable, yet not recognized as such. It cannot help to act as irrational fools; the strength of the masculist movement may well be in keeping our cool and remaining reasonable, persuasive, and powerfully confident in what you believe to be true.

  2. Hey, awesome article. You really have to do an article about child abuse assumptions. My 6 year old daughter recently got a light spanking (for lying and not telling the truth ironically), and shared a rather “elaborated” version of it at school, which resulted in Childrens Protective Services getting called. They wouldnt tell us the nature of the call, who made the call, and I wasnt allowed to come down to the office with my girlfriend and our daughter. My girlfriend, in a state of panic, called her sister, a lawyer, and a ministry contact, and all of them all suggested the same thing: “Has your boyfriend had any *unsupervised* time with your daughter?” The legal aid lawyer even told her that in these cases its usually the boyfriend and she was probably going to have to choose between the boyfriend and her child. It turned out to be the school (I’m great at interrogations) and I really doubt if the girl had said ‘Mom spanked me 10 times with a paddle and my pants to my knees” if the Ministry would even have been called in the first place. Of course, I only spanked her 4 times and her pants werent to her knees, I didnt even pull them down enough to see the crack of her ass, and the “paddle” was a soft rubber cake mixing spatula, which *ironically* I used instead of my hand so as to not raise any spectre of possible sexual intentions. None of this however even stopped a wide variety of women ranging from roomates to her sister to lawyers to ministry staff from basically fingering me for some sort of sexual abuse. When a 6 year old is caught lying and deceiving and gets punishment for it (to stop her from using this tactic in the future, like say when she’s 13 and can really get herself into trouble) and then goes to school and repeats the same behavior (and the complainant included that she is known for this type of behavior on the report to the CPS) and next thing you know there are CPS officers involved, its rediculous. The child is always well fed, well clothed, well treated, and does not complain of spankings all the time or yelling at home or parents fighting. Why the hell does the fact that Dad gave her a spanking instead of mom warrant a phone call to CPS? I have the pleasure of a meeting with this resource teacher tomorrow. It will be fun to watch her squirm when she realizes that I’m actually a very dilligent, educated father and I have been written up in the local newspaper as a stalwart citizen who defends the neighborhood from crime and criminals and have been nominated as Citizen of the Year in my community.

    Feminism corrupted another one and the result is that it almost taught my daughter at the tender age of SIX that you can run and lie when you dont like it when daddy makes you do crap you dont like (ie cleaning your room) you just whine and embellish the story to the school and they will take daddy away. What garbage. What six year old doesnt tell horrible tales about their single spanking in over a year, spankings suck they’re supposed to.

    1. I hope you will not be surprised to find out that a 6 year old girl has more power then a male “Citizen of the Year”.

      They might think that such a title should not be a reason to stop prosecuting a child abuser.

      In many countries, spanking or slapping a child is a crime already.

      Why are you not married anyway, you pervert?

      Check Strauss Kahn and German weather man Kachelmann in our blog. They were philanderers, that is crime enough to suppose you are a rapist.

      I wish you luck and hope you report back.

  3. The biggest problem is that there is an ongoing debate within the movement as to what constitutes men’s rights ‘extremism’, and we have both been central to that. I would have thought that demands extremely delicate care when it comes to an article that appears to both mock and call for a men’s rights movement unafraid of appearing ‘extreme’.

    To my mind, it’s not a good idea to ‘out yourself’ as a crazy extremist, and then say, ‘well actually, it’s all tongue in cheek, please don’t ban me’.

    1. I notice. All that is said here is quite reasonable. Compared to what others say this stuff is quite extreme. But there is some extreme stuff, almost up to feminist level: See some of the details, like suggesting inversion of burden of proof in birth control lies.

      I was holding back here, I will try to put more extreme stuff elsewhere. But, feminists are sooo extreme and we got so used to it, it really is hard to match them.

  4. Quote : “The point of this article (that might get missed) is that feminists’ achievements are TOTALLY ABSURD but have actually been ACHIEVED. How can I make this more clear?”

    Not by comparing them to men’s rights demands that are entirely reasonable.

  5. HOWEVER, the reason why I had concerns was because I felt that you would mix entirely reasonable demands with those that do seem extreme or are intended as tongue-in-cheek. And, looking at your list a second time, you have done exactly that. There is the danger here that you’re marginalising and mocking demands that both you and I know are neither absurd or injust, and have no connection to the selfish, sexual injustices committed by feminists (except as attempts to remove those injustices). You’ve also confused the matter by stating at Reddit that the article is tongue-in-cheek.

    1. I hope this is food for thought. I know that the child porn position could get people’s defenses up. I do hope that this gets people into discussions, which might include condemning a few points and supporting others.

      The point of this article (that might get missed) is that feminists’ achievements are TOTALLY ABSURD but have actually been ACHIEVED. How can I make this more clear? Feminist achievements, from the point of view of a 1950’ies man look much worse then “1984” or other fantasies. What actually has been achieved looks like an untrue NIGHTMARE.

      Totally EXTREME. People just got desensitized and used to it. Feminist ACHIEVEMENTS in the legal arena are TOTALLY SHOCKING and like medieval feudal law.

    2. Even Radical Masculist still suffers from feminist brain washing and thinks that perfectly reasonable men’s rights demands are extremists.

      @antifeminist: You are right with several of your statements here.

      But, to my defense:

      Men’s Rights makes complaints and whines about certain things (like about paternity lies).

      Nobody seriously petitions to his congressman to make paternity lies a felony and to reimburse the cuckold for all his expenses and punitive damages for his suffering. Everyone stops short of that.

      Also, especially in this article, I tried to hold back on extremism in order not to alienate people too much. More will come.

      But in today’s feminist brainwashed society, perfectly reasonable demands seem to be lunatic fringe ideas. Like in the middle ages, the demand to espouse theories of planetary movements that contradict the Bible. That was extremist, though very reasonable, as an afterthought.

  6. There’s some very good points here – I did have concerns when you sketched this article to me, but I think you’ve pulled it off very well.

    The mistake in thinking that we can defeat feminism by purely polite and restrained argument is that it assumes feminism is a rational, but corrupted movement. In fact, it’s a deeply irrational movement, in the sense of being largely blind, subconsciously driven, and out of the control of individuals.

    Unfortunately, it will probably come down to who shouts for their rights the loudest. Of course, some in the men’s rights movement may say that the point of being ‘reasonable’ is to convince fellow men, not feminists. But we all surely know that the biggest challenge we face is overcoming the ingrained chivalry of most men. Our best chance of achieving that, and waking men up from their stupor, in my opinion, is through anger and rhetoric, not measured words.

Leave a Reply to Radical Masculist Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.