Sunday, 2 July 2017

Why MRAs Are Old News - and why Pan-Anglosphere Dissidence is the New Men’s Movement


Misandry is encoded in the Anglosphere's Cultural DNA

The 'old school' or 'first wave' MRAs who believed the Anglosphere could be reformed and remoulded along less misandrist lines are looking so dated. Yes, a lot of what of A Voice for Men, Warren Farrell and Angry Harry talked about is essentially right (and they deserve respect for that): but so what? For all their efforts, these guys did not change a single thing in the lives of real-world men. Men still get ass-raped in the divorce courts, the lamestream media still set women atop pedestals and men are still ten times more likely to get a custodial sentence for a criminal offence.

The great problem with those ‘first wave’ Manosphere writers is that they failed to see what we Pan-Anglosphere Dissidents see all too clearly: that Anglo-Saxon culture is inherently misandrist and, as such, is inherently impervious to pro-male reform. In a nutshell, that is the big difference between us second-wave Manosphere writers and the ‘old school’ MRAs already alluded to. They believed reforming the system was possible, while we (in our various ways) have concluded that it is not. Essentially, the Anglosphere is built on gynocentric, misandrist foundations and, barring a complete cultural overthrow, that is how it is going to stay. An enlightened male can either remain as a malcontent within the Anglo-Feminist Matrix; he can exploit the Matrix to fund an alternative lifestyle; or he can leave it altogether. Those are the real choices available to red-pilled males; reform is an ‘old school’ pipe dream.

In the farewell post on his Men-Factor Blog, Richard Scarecrow drove right to the core of the ineradicable Anglo-American problem - hatred of men:
 
The core issue that is not addressed often - is HATRED OF MEN.
Get ready for a long-ass rant. One that you've heard before if you read my blog.
When I was in college, my friends and I had the typical attitude, "Don't hit a women, Scold any scum man that hits his wife/girlfriend" etc...(sound philosophy to be sure - one I still uphold today - I will not hit a woman unless my life depended on it).  Then, Lorena Bobbitt happened.  We all noticed how radically different women thought than men - they all had a "You Go Girl!" attitude towards the incident.  This stumped all of us.  We despised any man who engaged in physical violence against a woman.  Women were applauding a woman who sexually mutilated her husband - and knew NOTHING about the situation...  That is when we started realizing how deep this hatred ran. 

We were all beaten (metaphorically) over the head with "be nice to girls" talk growing up.  When we were in our twenties we were all scratching our heads wondering why women were so malicious, callous, and sadistic towards men, while men were the opposite towards women.  Quite a wake up call.  Once divorces started happening, the hatred of men (insane rage, relentless baseless vindictiveness, and sadism) became more apparent.  More of my friends got divorced, and more of my friends got into drugs and liquor to sedate themselves from the insanely hate-filled women in their lives (and to think - for a while - I felt left out!!!).  Of course, this happened all over again with the Katherine Kieu Becker incident - a "superior" Asian woman (but one raised and living in an Anglo context – RK) who doesn't hate sexually mutilated her husband.

You can change divorce laws all you want.  You can bias them in favor of women - it takes evil sadistic women to exercise those laws.  The problem is not any laws on the books.  The problem is the sadistic women who enjoy the privilege of those laws (99.999999%).  Women who have the doors held open for them - Women who have 30-40 guys pining for them - Women who can get sex anytime they want for free - Women who can treat a lot of men like crap and get away with it - Women who get gifts and money showered on them in some misguided attempt to get laid - Women who are in fact privileged and pedestalized.  NOT NOT NOT women who are abused (verbally or physically), raped, tortured, insulted every 5 minutes, cussed at etc...  No - those things are reserved for men.
The MRM is a complete miss.  It is geared to changing laws (futile).  Anti-Feminism is less of a miss, but still a miss (the WikiPedia definition).  MGTOW is embarrassing, MHRM is a bunch of faggots.
Various "man-o-sphere" blogs talk about sex and whatnot - yawn.  Some have a whore/virgin attitude - old argument - yawn.  Some force feminism into a body shape - fat - yawn.  Some force feminism into "right-wing Christian women" - i.e. they are trying to separate feminism from the left wing - yawn - fail - fuck off.  Some re-enforce the fact that feminism was a "left-wing anti-Christian" movement - yawn - fail - fuck off.  Few of them address the issue of HATE - specifically - how thick and mindlessly vindictive the hatred of men is in women today - not just one political party - and certainly not just fat women.

What can be done to combat the hate - well - nothing.  Myself, I fail to care for women (except immediate family).  I do not need to care about a murdered woman who made a bad mating choice and ended up dead for it.  I do not need to care when a woman gets arrested for hitting a police officer because she is used to hitting men and suffering no consequences.  I do not need to feel any compassion for these people - they are a cancer in society.  They make bad mating choices and end up dead, single whatever - Why should I care - I don't.  Do I mock them - ABSOLUTELY!  Is it because they are "having sex with everybody but me"?  NOPE!  Their bad choices in mating leads their predicament - a predicament I have to pay higher taxes for - be it for abortions - insurance - higher taxes - welfare for single moms etc...  I end up paying for their careless behaviour all while I am the enemy to them (a white heterosexual male). 

Well said, Scarecrow - for that is the cock and balls of it. AVfM and the Old School Men’s Rights writers always assumed that if only they highlighted the iniquities of an anti-male judiciary, education system and mass media then – as if by magic – reform would inevitably follow. In reality, Anglo-American civilization has just carried on in the same old misandrist way because misandry and gynocentrism are embedded in its socio-cultural DNA. And that is why the old school MRAs could no more reform the Anglosphere than they could hold back the tides of the sea; and why their efforts to do so were doomed from the very beginning


Old school MRAs are like King Cnut: Powerless

MGTOWS are deluded in a different way - they claim to shun Anglo women who already view them with utter contempt: not much of a protest. In truth, with their rampant misandry, fridigity and hypergamy, entitled Anglo-American females positively welcome the self-removal of such low-status 'losers' from their lives (if they even notice their absence at all).


Entitled Anglo women despise MGTOWS anyway!

When I began this project – if it may be considered such – I was a fairly marginalized figure in the Manosphere. The old school reformists held sway. At first, I even had to call myself an MRA; a decade ago, no terminology existed to properly describe my unique vision. Gradually, though, a coherent terminology began to emerge through ceaseless argument and discussion, through mimesis and mutation. And so the Pan-Anglosphere Male Resistance Movement, with its distinctive terminologies and modes of thought, came to be. And here we are.

In sum, the Anglosphere is just one cultural bloc among many cultural blocs and should be seen and criticized as such; there is nothing ‘special’ about it. The Anglosphere’s era of dominance in the late twentieth century was more the result of historical accident than anything else; and its future decline looks assured. The motor of this decline is misandrist Anglo-American feminism and the social dysfunction – not to mention male alienation – it leaves in its wake. But this decline cannot be arrested, nor should it be; it is the inevitable fulfilment of the Anglosphere’s misandrist destiny. Low trust relationships, political alienation, a costly underclass and educational failure already blight the Anglo-American bloc, and will only worsen; but this is to be celebrated. Men cannot arrest the slide into barbarism, even if they wanted to; no, they must look to foreign shores for fulfilment, peace and pleasure. A single mercenary male without social ties has the Anglo-Feminist Matrix at his mercy; he is untouchable, boundless, almost a god.

That is our movement’s unique insight.


The Anglosphere's Institutional Misandry is Beyond Reform




38 comments:

  1. http://www.returnofkings.com/124599/what-its-like-to-use-online-dating-in-russia
    Good illustration of your great article.. First hand experience from the Russian online dating culture.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It certainly seems very different...

      In the Anglosphere, not even a landwhale would turn up for a date with a bag full of beer.

      Delete
  2. More and more men are moving out of Anglo countries and moving to more man friendly countries like Russia, Ukraine, Brazil, Columbia, Thailand and the Philippines.

    Why any man would want to marry an Anglo woman is beyond me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One more deceived with Brazil. Do not think that here is different this country is Americanized for decades and bows to everything that the Anglo world creates. Mainly in large cities. Do not be deluded with images of carnival.

      Delete
  3. One more deceived with Brazil. Do not think that here is different this country is Americanized for decades and bows to everything that the Anglo world creates. Mainly in large cities. Do not be deluded with images of carnival.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because your country has become infected by Anglo culture does not challenge the fact that Anglo culture is the problem. And an infected culture can be healed.

      Delete
    2. Yes but what I want to talk about is for the Anglo men not to think that if they moved immediately to Brazil they would become the promised refuge.

      Delete
    3. Brazilian Anon,

      Having spoken to many Brazilian girls (I speak Portuguese too, though not particularly fluently), I still think there is a clear difference between them and American girls. Brazilian girls clearly seem more open and friendly, even in the relatively closed South.

      Having said that, Brazilian culture does appear rather trashy, many Brazilian women have tattoos and Brazilians as a whole seem less intelligent than Anglos.

      Delete
    4. DaRick

      In the lower classes still. But the middle and upper classes totally Anglo.

      Delete
    5. Brazilian Anon (?),

      It seems to me that the upper classes pretty much everywhere do not behave like the lower/middle classes - they just do their own thing. No argument there.

      As for the middle class, it is hard to define what that is in Brazil because the country is so unequal and the southern regions (plus RJ/SP) are clearly richer than the northern regions anyway.

      However if it means anything most of the Brazilian girls I have spoken to are white, so they were probably not too poor in their given regions.

      Delete
  4. For those of us who cannot & will not seek greener pastures, MGTOW remains the most rational response to the Anglobitch.

    We will withdraw to a safe distance, 'starve the beast' and speed its collective decline by contributing as little as possible.

    The Anglobitch will miss the loss of our 'nice guy' resources, even as it condemns us as 'losers' & celebrates our absence.

    And, it will miss our chivalrous assistance when it fails & falls.

    In the face of our certain defeat, we can only ensure that the Anglobitch victory is a Pyrrhic one.

    What are our alternatives?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess that strategy is the best one for the sexually disenfranchised male who is bound to the Anglosphere. Certainly, starving the Anglobitch of narcissistic supply will ruffle her feathers, as will cutting the supply of beta suckers willing to 'man up' and marry her post-Wall pussy. That said, while such a strategy will impact on past-prime Anglo women and Anglo society in general, the hot young Anglobitch on her pedestal won't notice it at all. And there are still plenty of simps willing to step up and worship the rest.

      Delete
    2. Thank you rk for pointing out how futile mgtow is. From a feminist's perspective, I'd wager a guess they view it as a total joke.

      More men making fools out of themselves.

      Delete
  5. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-40504452
    In the meantime in the kingdom of Sweden..public castrations to follow??

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rookh, I disagree with what you said about MGTOW. MGTOW gives men the headspace they need to see how the women of the Anglosphere treat them and give them the opportunity to walk away from Anglosphere women and to live their own lives on their own terms.

    On another note, MGTOW has been gaining popularity among young men and teenage boys in the Anglosphere as of late. One good example is the number of teenage boys in Australia going MGTOW has been growing as of late and it shows no signs of stopping.

    http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/parenting/teens/first-men-now-boys-are-going-their-own-way/news-story/7aa04498e3c2673ecd4f474573258b10

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good article. However, I never said all aspects of MGTOW are bad - as you say, it creates a conceptual clearing for young men to appraise their situation and develope self-respect free of Anglo society's gynocentric expectations. It wasn't those aspects of the movement I was attacking, though; more the vocal branch that seems to think shunning women who despise them anyway will somehow upset those women when there are millions of simps still willing to pedestalize them. Or in the case of Zyzz and his followers, simps who are willing to juice up and die young trying to impress them.

      Delete
  7. As far as most men are concerned, female youth, beauty & sexuality will always be in demand until it is not due to the passing of their youth, the loss of physical beauty & the extinction of reproductive capacity.

    Also known as 'hitting the wall', the post-40 Anglobitch experiences a catastrophic drop in female social & sexual market value, becoming mostly 'untouchable' to the male majority, unless that female demonstrates either exceptional utility or maternal reproductive value.

    Therein lies our opportunity:

    Mercilessly, we draw attention to their change is status. We expose them to public ridicule; we mock their sterility & inutility; we harp on their advancing age; we belabour their declining looks; we emphasise their new-found disposability and we make a spectacular example of them to those women who come after.

    In short, we make them Honorary Men.

    And, when they accuse us of the same & worse, we agree. Because Misandry. Because 'Equality'. And we speed the decline.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that making post-Wall women Honorary Men might warn younger women about the dangers of their present attitudes. However, men (including MGTOWs) are not really that interested in post-Wall women (apart from female relatives) at the best of times, which somewhat limits the impact of such a strategy. Another regulating factor is whether men take up such a strategy en masse or whether it remains exclusively MGTOW; if the latter, it won't be particularly effective. The very nature of the repressive Anglosphere means there will always be a certain percentage of males who continue to pedestalize women, no matter how they treat men. Barring a complete overthrow of the existing culture, some pedestalization of women will always persist.

      Still, the pan-Anglosphere MSM is noting a certain shortage of simps willing to 'wife up' post-Wall women, so the MGTOW campaign must be working at some level.

      Delete
  8. Some say that feminism was valid when it started, but was quickly flooded with cunts and carpet munching hags using it as an excuse to validate their male hatred.

    Can the same thing be said about mrm/mhrm/mgtow/pua etc...???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes it can. The contemporary MGTOW movement in particular seems to embody the same puritanical fixations as Anglo-American feminism - not least gender seperatism and a monkish devotion to celibacy. What is threatening or revolutionary about that? Men embracing puritanism in the Anglosphere threatens no one - at worst, it only strengthens the Anglo-Feminist Matrix.

      While shunning Anglo women is a better option than 'wifing up' some post-Wall harridan and paying a ruinous financial price if she tires of you, a lack of sexual intimacy is still psychologically unhealthy for the vast majority of men. While there are worse alternatives, going MGTOW in the Anglosphere is still not the best option for sexually-alienated males.

      Delete
    2. The whole thing sounds like a catch 22.

      Delete
    3. More a choice between various evils. The best option of all is departing the Anglosphere; or at least not basing one's life around it.

      Delete
  9. The whole thing is a 'catch 22' because there are no good options in a sexually-repressive society that promises false sexual reward to stimulate masculine performance.

    We are donkeys chasing the proverbial carrot-on-a-stick, a promised reward that never gets any closer to us no matter how fast we run, while the stick is used liberally to ensure our continued cooperation & obedience.

    MGTOW (Men on Strike) is a lousy option, to be sure, but less lonely, burdensome & conditional than the alternatives.

    And, the promised feminine reward, it is sour, unpleasant, transitory & not as portrayed by western media.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely. Men on Strike is the least lousy option, nothing more.

      The whole feminine 'reward' thing is also a product of residual misandry and sexual repression.

      Delete
    2. America is a sexually repressed country, it's one of the few countries in the world where prostitution is illegal.

      It's the puritans who are keeping prostitution illegal in the USA (the religious fanatics and the feminists).

      Delete
    3. @jamesbond - you're wrong. The so called "puritanical fanatics" you mention are closet faggots that like raping small boys. They scream about how "wrong" it is for grown men to look at grown women while covertly raping boys.

      There's nothing puritanical about that.

      Delete
  10. Puritanism is defined as 'scrupulous moral rigor, especially hostility to social pleasures and indulgences' and, as such, it is a form of deliberately unachievable perfectionism that vilifies normal human sexuality (aka 'sins; moral failings') as a means of social control.

    By redefining normal sexuality as aberrancy, this belief system attempts to create intense feelings of shame, guilt & unworthiness within the believer who is left with three potential responses:

    (1) He accepts his unworthiness, becomes humble and redoubles his efforts to perfect himself through good works, ceaseless labours & self-abnegation;

    (2) He redirects, subverts or perverts his sexuality towards various fetishes, hobbies & obsessions that are considered less 'sinful' as in the case of consumerism, physical fitness fanaticism, wealth accumulation, car mania, bondage & homosexuality; or

    (3) He practices hypocrisy, becomes a narcissist, puts himself on a pedestal & LIES constantly in an attempt to prove himself perfect, proper & puritan to all concerned.

    The same logic applies to western women too:

    Option (1) women are humble rarities, traditional housewives or the mythical NAWALT.

    Option (2) women are compulsive consumers, shoe collectors, celebrity worshippers, trend followers & (in general) manic-depressives.

    But, given the prevalence of Option (3) women, it only follows that a society that pedestalises women & holds them up as 'perfect' will produce the biggest crop of narcissistic lying hypocritical quims that the world has ever seen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent definition of puritanism.

      Puritanism exists in Anglo countries and so does feminism. There must be a connection between the two.

      Delete
    2. Saying puratanism in the faggot sphere is a waste of time.

      Once women start putting out, they'll start saying things like cock carousel and slut etc...

      I'm starting to think the real problem in society are the men calling themselves MRA'S to start with

      Delete
  11. I think that the core problem is that Anglo women are evil. They are not 100% evil, of course, since such a thing does not exist in this world.

    The behavior of Anglo women is similar to the behavior of a serial killer. They attempt to probe their victims (i.e men) for weaknesses and then strike at the most opportune time.

    The response from men either takes the form of appeasement (similar to how Britain and France dealt with Nazi Germany before WWII) or of claiming that the "system" and not women is the problem.

    Tradcons and PUAs are in the appeasement camp (albeit the appeasement of each camp takes different forms).

    MRAs and MGTOWs try to fix the "system" (MRAs through political activism and MGTOWs through non-participation). However, their efforts are futile on the large-scale because the real problem is cultural, spiritual and ontological (in a very deep sense). However, MGTOW is a good option for individual men who are unable or unwilling to escape the Anglo world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "MGTOWS try to fix the 'system' (... through non-participation)." Umm, not exactly

      MGTOW isn't a "movement" like the "MRA movement." It's a lifestyle, based on taking care of your own needs and living your life as you choose, rather than following Society's lemming-path. It's a matter of seeing through the propaganda and social-conditioning, and abandoning the false values that men are goaded and shamed into pursuing "for Her sake." It's not about "fixing the system," it's about disengaging from "the system" so you can live your own life your own way.

      It's a simple system:

      Do not marry.
      Do not cohabitate.
      Do not procreate.
      Take care of yourself, first.
      Follow your own dreams.

      Delete
    2. It is true that MGTOWs have washed their hands of the system and are no longer trying to fix it. It is also true that MGTOWs have opted out of the 'men should protect women for no reward' agenda promoted by the Anglo-American mainstream. And these are commendable positions.

      However, many (not all) MGTOW videos and blogs seem to present the fallacy that THEY are rejecting Anglo women, when in fact prime Anglo women have no interest in them anyway. This aspect of MGTOW philosophy seems to be a kind of coping strategy to nullify female indifference or hostility rather than a coherent perspective. In truth, hyper-hypergamous prime Anglo women WANT MGTOWs out of their lives and would heartily condone this aspect of MGTOW if they knew about it (which, let's face it, they probably don't).

      In sum, MGTOW Volceldom is just a self-justification excercise to evade the reality of female indifference or contempt. This is not to say MGTOW doesn't have a lot to offer in other areas of life.

      Delete
  12. The best plan is to work hard, work smart, and don't ever get married.
    Don't buy anything (except gas & groceries)

    Take the money and run.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I was much struck by the last of the four photos; Angela Denoke as Salome in the latest Covent Garden production. Salome is surely the ultimate and end result of Feminist (before her time); obsessed with a The Baptist who calls her out for her wickedness to the point that only his blood-stained death will satisfy her. There is however a satisfying ending; so disgusted by his step-daughter, Herod orders two Roman soldiers to crush her between their shields. Opera producers always balk at showing those rivers of blood.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I never knew Herod had her crushed between shields but such a grisly fate is no less than she deserved.

      Delete
  14. Agreed that the term "MRA" is passe. In fact, it is so passe that I don't even use that word any more. At all. Ever.

    I also don't use the term "men's rights movement", and, needless to say, I am not a part of any such thing myself. I favor the political division of labor between "men's rights" and "feminism's wrongs" as points of political focus -- with my own focus being on feminism's wrongs, with my political mandate being that of SAF (or Strict Anti-feminism).

    The SAF Manifesto:

    https://antifeministpraxis.com/saf-manifesto/

    Here on Anglobitch, you are speaking a language which I, myself, no longer speak -- although I spoke it in years past, when I kept the "Counter-Feminist" blog.

    Many things have changed dramatically in the wake of Gamergate and the rise of mainstream anti-feminism. It's a whole new landscape now, and I am grabbing it with both hands. . . .

    I have kissed the legacy discourse goodbye, almost totally, and embraced Intellectual Perestroika.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is good to challenge legacy discourse, especially ineffectual legacy discourse. However, AFP itself seems quite enmired in the legacy notion that 'feminism' is the only problem. In truth, anti-male gynocentric values would exist anyway, partly for biological reasons but also because the subliminal puritanism of Anglo-American nations automatically exalts women as blameless goddesses who can do no wrong. Old style MRAs also share this stale fixation on 'feminism', and we all know how lame and impotent they are.

      I also question whether there is a 'mainstream' anti-feminist movement in western societies. Women are still exalted by the law, they can still roam about making wild accusations against men with impunity, while education and other institutions remain resolutely misandrist. Given these facts, AFP comes over as a bunch of upper middle class, highly educated white men detached from consensus reality. While their fixation on intellectual rigour and academic probity is admirable, they assume that 'being right' will instantly convert everyone to the justice of their cause - another MRA fallacy. MRAs have 'been right' for decades, yet nothing really changes.

      So while the AFP movement is right to attack old-school MRAs, they remain enmired in too many legacy positions themselves.

      Delete
    2. No, we are, and do, no such thing. Nick and I make that pretty clear.

      Also, if you haven't seen the rise of mainstream antifeminism in the last 2-3 years, you are either blind as a bat or you need to get out more. This ain't 2006 now, believe me.

      Hint: the persistence of entrenched institutional power structures is not a relevant gauge of the shifting zeitgeist. Those structures don't change overnight - they are typically the very LAST thing thing to get altered, so I hardly pay at any attention to such things. Those dominoes will fall when the time is right.

      Nor is AFP a "movement". We disclaim movements, or membership in such. Our principal concern is to uphold non-feminist alterity and promote a paradigm shift toward the sector system as a controlling meta-narrative.

      Praxis is not "mired" in anything.

      By the way, you seem pretty much like an old school "MRA" yourself, but perhaps I am missing something.


      Delete