Friday, January 17, 2014

Over A Year Has Passed

It has been over a year now since I confronted misandry onthe streets of Toronto at the OCAD campus on Richmond St. and wrote my famousAVFM article. I haven’t had time to address any of what the artist has been saying at her Tumblr blog that I inspired. I’ll try to be concise and then just move on because I don’t want to just be an anti-feminist blogger.
I am tired of fighting feminism. The entire ideology has been disproven. There was a time that I believed feminism was based on trying to achieve equality, but, it has obviously become a vehicle for destruction of the Western, free-market civilization. By indoctrinating followers with illogical arguments that do not hold up against demonstrable facts of biology, it has made itself academically irrelevant. It exists only to employ professors because it is politically necessary to appear sympathetic to the cause of women and feminism is handy that way. However, feminism, and the political decisions made to accommodate it are destructive to men and women. Feminists, indoctrinated as they are, are blind to these facts. So, it is basically useless to fight feminism. The only thing that makes sense in this environment is to strengthen your own culture and wait for the feminists to try and take the fight to you. Feminism’s fortress has been routed, the walls knocked to the ground, but the defenders insist that their defenses still stand. There is no sense trying to destroy that which has already been destroyed, bulldozed over and dynamite blasted, even if the defenders insist that it is indestructible.
So, I'll just like to take a last chance to address the issues raised in my interaction with the revered artist.
1. Rape Culture
The artist mounted an epic defense against my claim that rape culture doesn’t exist with a resounding argument which I’ll paraphrase, “Because, uh, it does exist.” How eloquent.
Well, let me explain how Canada does not have a rape culture. Rape is illegal. Rape is actually treated more seriously than murder in some ways. Why? Because murder can often be caused by a fight between equals. Two drug dealers, say. The murderer is seen as dangerous and locked away, but, he maintains some honour from the street. Rapists get no such respect.
But culture is not just the laws, you say. Well, laws are an extension of the culture, but, I’ll accept that the relationship is not 100%. To show how rape is not a part of our culture, look at how much shame is heaped upon the crime. Rapists are simply excommunicated from the culture.
2. Nice Guys Rape
The artist made this statement on a giant pink poster. She also wrote a pointless essay defending it which I’m not really going to acknowledge here other than to say that just because someone appears charming does not mean that they are, in fact, nice which seemed to be the crux of her argument.
To think that someone could be nice and also be a rapist, you must either devalue the term rape and deem it possible to rape someone and not mean any harm or claim that rapists can intentionally cause harm and still maintain the standing of a "nice guy" in society.
First, it is not rape to have sex with someone who was drunk but conscious and enthusiastic. It is not rape to have sex with someone who seemed willing, but who felt uncomfortable afterward. To rape someone, I would argue that a person must know that the other person did not want sex but went ahead anyways. That takes care of the first case – the “accidental” rapist who was really a nice guy but didn’t know any better doesn't exist.
Now to see if someone can be considered a nice guy and be a rapist (intentionally harming the victim), consider this statement:
“My friend is a nice guy. He only rapes his girls he knows really well.”
Does that statement conform or conflict with Western culture?
Now think back to a time and a place when slavery was widely practiced – the Southern U.S. around 1850 – and consider this statement:
“My friend is a nice guy. He treats his slaves almost like regular people.”
In the context of that culture, that statement would be plausible. Today, we recognize that slavery is an abomination and is not tolerated. Nobody could be considered nice if they treat anyone like a slave.
Now think of a place that currently exists which could possibly be a rape culture – Saudi Arabia – and consider this statement.
“My friend is a nice guy. His wife is not good though, so he raped her and beat her a little to keep her in line, according to the Koran. She has behaved well since then.”
See the difference?
3. I Am Not a Stalker
Now, I’ll address the accusations and labels that have been applied to me on the artist's Tumblr site. Apparently, she thinks I am a stalker. Stalker is a very strong word which is basically defined as recurring criminal harassment. I would like to just point out that I have not done anything close to harassment. I know it's easy for feminists to apply dehumanizing terms to men they do not like, but, this is a stretch.
I’ll just list the activities that are causing me to be labelled a stalker. I took photos of a window display visible from a public street. I posted these photos on my blog. I found traffic to my blog from a Tumblr website. I clicked on those links. I read the Tumblr pages and found that I was being discussed. I monitored the website to see what else was being said about me. On occasion, I wrote posts in response. If this activity makes me a stalker, then, there are a lot of stalking going on in this darn Internet thing. I mean there are a lot of people posting photos of stuff on the Internet and clicking links to blogs writing about the stuff they posted. Even including the artist and owner of the Tumblr site herself could be considered stalking me. She didn't take photos, but, she visits my Blog from time to time. She even used my words as inspiration for her name.
Apparently, the attention that I paid to her art caused her a lot of stress. She even said that the stress was worse than what she felt from a personal assault that she also experienced. I would feel bad if I had caused anyone this kind of stress. However, I have not done anything to cause stress that bad. The artist is so conditioned to accept the role of victim that she feels powerless and this causes her stress, not me.
The biggest problem with feminism today is its embrace of victimhood. Accepting the roll of a victim creates a fixed mindset in a person. Once that mindset takes hold, a person feels less powerful and less able to deal with normal problems. It’s an agency robbing label, making the people feel like they are less able to affect the world around them and that they need help dealing with other people. The powerlessness increases the stress level since the “victim” now feels like the world or someone is out to hurt them. Reinforced by the positive support of the rest of the victim culture, the person sinks deeper into the identity of the victim.
This is why feminism is so destructive to the women who fall for its lies. Seeing victimization everywhere, its followers are handicapped. Instead of making them stronger, it turns them into weaklings. The best thing that feminism could do to regain relevance in the modern world is to stop promoting victimhood and to start teaching women to focus on their individual strength and power.
I did nothing to warrant the accusation of stalker, but, since I’m a man and I’m not being nice to you, any bad label will do. All I did really was critique some art. If that causes you this much stress, then I have some advice for you:  don’t create art and share it publicly or display it in public places. It will be difficult to be an artist if this is the case, so you might want to pick a different career. Artists tend to be sensitive, but, their need for attention and desire to communicate their thoughts and feelings overpowers their fear of criticism. You certainly crave attention, but, you will probably find some thicker skin to be helpful, especially if you insist on creating politically provocative art. Take it from the Old Hero. Thick skin can be extremely useful.
Don’t forget that I gave you a positive review of your work “How Do You Protect Yourself At Night?” You know the one with the baseball bat? Well, I agree that self-defense is important and a much better strategy than those Slut-Walk supporters. Imagine, advising people to walk around with provocative clothing with no thought for defending yourself. Insane if you ask me.
Finally, I’m going to take this opportunity to apply a label to you, since you insist on labelling me. You are an acolyte. You are most certainly an acolyte of the hateful religion of feminism. Subjected to rote memorization of the catechisms of Cultural Marxist doctrines, trained to turn your painful experiences into hatred you are a warrior for the cause of female empowerment. Now you take part in their rituals and spread the word, fighting anyone who challenges the doctrines.
It’s sad really. You can’t use reason to counteract the spell of feminism and any reason you have has been disabled by the straight-jacket like thinking of feminism its victim worship. I guess you could say that you are a victim of feminism. It’s tough to admit since it is mostly your own doing. But society doesn’t really help when it refuses to allow real scrutiny to be applied to feminism. It must feel good to be a part of something that tells you that you are special. Don’t feel bad. You are so young that you still have most of your lifetime to recover. The first step away from a cult is the hardest. Once you understand that you don't need them and you are stronger without them, it gets much easier.
Now, I hope to move on from this chapter. I think I’ve said all I need to.

Friday, November 15, 2013

Selling Pride

I commented over at Uncle Bob on his post about Promiscuity as Self Mutilation. I appreciate it when people attempt to inspire good behavior in others. Of course, all the reactionary blogosphere can do is react negatively to the disgusting behavior around them. Liberals love it because they get to chastise the reaction as judgmental. Being judgmental is one of the worst things possible in the liberal mindset. If you're truly open minded, you don't say anything about the behavior of others - unless they're filthy rotten conservatives. Then you can have at it.

Commenter Glen Filthie raises a good point that it is a hard sell to young people when you're competing with all of the partying and hoopla offered by the other side.

Think about what your morals and ethics offer to today's young man:

critical thinking
self restraint
responsibility to others
work ethics

It's true, I respond, but you're missing the key ingredient in the sales pitch - pride. Go and read it there.

It is true that I am trying to instill pride in my son. I think this is the utmost importance in his healthy development. A proud person will have no fear facing difficult situations with critical thinking. A proud person will make the responsible decision, showing self restraint. A proud person will keep his responsibilities to others and develop a strong work ethic.

A proud person would never rape someone. Why would he lower himself to such a horrible crime?

A proud person would never steal. He doesn't need to take something he hasn't earned from someone who has.

A proud person wouldn't assault someone, although he would certainly be willing to fight for a just reason. Harming another person causes harm to oneself.

A proud person will always make the best decision for himself which means making the best decision for those around him.

A proud person will not destroy themselves with promiscuity instead of seeking loving relationships.

Pride, as long as it is balanced by the right level of humility will guide one through life's challenges and help overcome temptations along the way. Bring back pride.

It is nearly impossible to sell good, restrained behavior without allowing the well-deserved feelings of pride  as a reward. It's time that we start promoting pride as a positive emotion that everyone deserves to feel - if only they behave in a way that builds pride.

Sunday, November 3, 2013

Lesbian Feminist Haunted House

Do you think, perhaps, that the current status of government funding of "The Arts" needs to be rethought?

Leave alone the fact the arts people waste money and space on monstrosities like the OCAD building, instead of funding important courses like making gender. It doesn't matter; with the magic of government funding, they can afford both.

It's amazing that some people claim that there is no such thing as a feminist art degree.
I disagree; they're all feminist. I even have one. Of course, it's just called a Bachelor of Arts - English Literature, courtesy of a misspent youth, but it in fact it was a feminist, Marxist art degree. If you're lucky enough, and you follow the same path I did, you'll run into a teacher like David Gilmour (the other one) and you'll only get a Marxist art degree - at least only a partially feminist degree since you will have to take other courses.

Take a look at all of these things together: publicly funded buildings hovering above the street, sponsoring anti-man art projects and movements to remove people who merely claim to be pro-male (not anti-female) and what does it amount to? It would seem to me to be a clear-cut case of structural sexism.

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Bake Sale Guilt

There was a bake sale today at work. Someone was raising money for something, I don't remember. We have these all the time and everyone feels the need to consume fattening baked goods which make my stomach ache and my head spin with the blood sugar spike. I couldn't afford the carbs after three weekends of binging, so, I just walked past on my way to the bathroom. I heard someone mention a spelt/flaxseed cookie which almost got me to stop, but, I just said to myself that it probably wouldn't be worth it. It's just food. I eat every day.

A co-worker mentioned that he didn't use the washroom all morning, just so he wouldn't have to deal with the hopeful glances from the bake sale people and deal with the guilt of not buying anything. I told him that he has a guilt addiction.

The fact is, he shouldn't feel guilty at all for not buying something. He's under no obligation to help other people by spending money on harmful goods. Giving money to charity makes us feel good because it assuages feeling of guilt. Even if we have a nagging feeling that the money is not doing much good. Even if we realize that the people running the charities are capitalizing on guilt to justify their existence.

Every time I see someone ask for money, I see an industry built on the guilt addiction of others. It's not that I don't believe in charity. It just seems that there are too many people working on keeping people helpless, in order to skim money off of industrious people and carving out a supposedly morally righteous living.

Am I too jaded in my middle-age? Either way, my eyes are open to the motivations of many of the guilt industry zealots and their vapid, thoughtless justifications for their work have no affect on me. I have heard too many people trying to vilify the hard working people just to guilt them into giving up hard earned cash. I am no longer vulnerable to the guilt balms they peddle.

Friday, October 25, 2013

Twisted By Knaves to Make a Trap For Fools

Now two men have been called up in front of the feminist firing line too feed the pious cravings of the masses. Paul Elam bravely appeared on ABC's 20/20 to be roasted like a Thanksgiving bird for the pleasure of the main stream media audience. (Has that aired yet? I can't view it online in Canada.) Now Gavin McInnes has appeared on Huffington Post Live to be tarred and feathered by the self-righteous inquisitors of the Church of Social Justice. The entire mano/alt-right sphere might as well be a flock of roosters to the elite liberals they were facing - all they'll hear is roosters crowing. See, it doesn't matter what you want to say to these people, they will not listen to anything that doesn't conform to their world view. If you start to challenge their pre-conceived notions, they will quickly put you into one of the categories of daemons that can be disposed of without due process.

Seriously, you have no right to share this planet with them. You should just stop taking up oxygen that could be used by some young open-minded gullible student who is willing to just accept the truths presented by their sociology professors and get on living in the brave new world. In their minds, you've given them the right to destroy you and pretend you never existed.

To them, you are outdated. You represent the powerful old-guard, afraid of threats. Thomas Sewell said, in Intellectuals and Society, that one of the technics that intellectuals will use to discount the reasoned arguments of those not espousing the anointed vision is to project emotional motivations upon the presenter of the argument, reducing their logic into emotion that can be brushed off. Count how many times Mary Anne Frank referred to Gavin's fear. Funny, I didn't sense any fear in him. All of the panelists completely missed the nuance, not hard when it's Gavin's nuance is masked by his showmanship, and plopped him into the evil category and went on spouting their nonsense about there not being any differences between the sexes. 

I think Gavin could have done a better job of making his points, but, it wouldn't have mattered. Personally, I would have stated outright that the attempts to stunt masculinity are damaging to men, boys and society. The ivory tower ideas being forced on society are trying to reverse the realities of nature and turning people into neurotic fools. I would have asked them to face the problems that feminism is causing to both men and women - and he did bring up the problems faced by women, but it was supposed to be a show about masculinity.

Look at Hugo Schwyzer. The man was raised by a feminist single mother to be basically ashamed of his masculinity. When it inevitably began to form, it was psychopathic. Without a strong example of masculinity and permission to explore his own masculinity, he never learned to express and control his own emotions and he turned into the fraud artist we all know and mock.

Mary Anne Frank believes that masculinity is just a construct. She states that there are no innate differences and we are moving to a healthier society. How, please tell, can we be healthier if we deny our own nature which rules us?

I am coming to realize that it is pointless arguing with feminists. I am still not done yet, though. I realize that it is impossible to defeat those who will not admit they've lost; victory should not be the goal when arguing with feminists. The first goal should be to make them uncomfortable - they have felt free range to spout idiotic tenants of an disproven theory and they should no longer feel that their BS will go unchallenged because of the sympathy garnered for women. The second goal should be to show those watching that it is ok to challenge feminism with observable facts.

Gavin allowed himself to be made fun of. That's not that bad. Enough people understand what he's saying even as the three effeminate men and the woman guffaw and laugh arrogantly to gain some new supporters. I think it is entirely reasonable to call someone a fucking idiot when they're being a fucking idiot and insulting you by putting words in your mouth. They chose him specifically because he is known for being outrageous. That makes him easy to mock as long as they continue to misrepresent his ideas - remember he's a daemon who no longer exists in their world. It would have been more constructive to calmly point out that they were putting words in his mouth, but, allowing them to mockingly dismiss truth presented so will, eventually, backfire.

Contrary to what these people say, we still need men who are tough, as Gavin argues. They seem to be under the impression that the world is suddenly going to turn nice and then everyone will begin working together. They don't really believe this. If they have children, they're enrolling them in competitive sports, fighting classes, dance classes, gymnastics and extra studies, precisely to prepare them for the tough world ahead of them. They simply have to spout this rhetoric to keep their positions in the hierarchy of madness that is the Politically Correct Left.

The ivory tower priests act high and mighty, but, they are simply the knaves that all men must learn to bear.