|
14/4/02
The Boys in the Back Room
Divvying Up the Masculist
Kingdom
Ray Remark
It’s easy to tell when the wings of a
nascent social movement catch first air: the wannabes, agenda-hawkers, and
assorted political lightweights huddle with their sycophants, plotting out the
Revolution – where it’s going, who gets to be rule, and how their own power
can be consolidated and maximized.
Oh! Brotherhood! false and fallen as ever,
dead to thy own heartbeat: mired in contrivance self-made.
Ten thousand kings sally forth and alas! –
only one Kingdom.
The men’s movement, emaciated infant that it
is, currently is experiencing its initial trickle of “voice” into the
American Machine.
That is, male viewpoint has graduated from
total censorship under matriarchy to merely overwhelming censorship.
Wendy McElroy, who describes herself as an “independent
feminist,” is now empowered by our feminist “patriarchy” to address the
masses on behalf of males.
Close on her (high) heels is Mr. Glenn Sacks,
whose writings on men have also found favor before the System.
Activists who have worked for decades in the
catacombs of the gyneocracy were amused last week at the Men’s Activism News
Network’s lead article, “Confronting Women-Bashing in the Men’s Movement,”
authored by Mr. Sacks -- that ubiquitous and prolific spokesman for American
masculinity.
The article, posted by the equally omnipresent
James Hanback, Jr. (“Nightmist”), attacked the National Coalition of Free
Men, and pummeled the “radicals” in the movement for their alleged misogyny.
In great detail, Mr. Sacks’ savaged these evil “woman bashers,” drawing up
a “profile” containing ten “characteristics” known to be possessed by
the women-haters. (In later correspondence, Mr. Sacks admitted that his original
“profiling list” was significantly longer – containing even more
misogynistic sins and sinners – but he reluctantly whittled it down for
economy’s sake. And they say god is dead.)
No doubt the National Organization for Women,
the academy, the media, and the “justice system” were greatly cheered by and
indebted to Sacks, Hanback, and MANN, for their assistance in broadening and
legitimizing the criminalization of maleness in America.
The marginalizing and silencing of dissident
males is now the “mainstream” of the men’s movement.
We’ve come a long way, baby!
The evening that Mr. Sacks’ hit-piece was
published, I saw Andrea Dworkin and Gloria Steinem capering down Fifth Avenue,
wearing top-hats. They tapdanced all night on ground zero, in the cold ashes of
what we once were.
In my posting on MANN I called Mr. Sacks’
article “political maneuvering.” Mr. Sacks had been feuding with the N.C.F.M.
Further, MANN’s political ally, Wendy McElroy, only days before was criticized
on soc.men when she turned up promoting her web site. Sacks’ piece was thus a
counterstrike, carefully planned for release by an “independent spokesman”
of the men’s movement. In reality, the article was a covert defense of both
McElroy and her political alliance with MANN – with the usual “women-bashing”
scapegoats tossed in for diversion.
Ah, yes, it’s The Boys in the Back Room. And
The Girls, too. Scrambling in the dogbowl of politics for those last chunks of
kibble.
See, I’m an old dude. Real old. A snarly
motherf**k, too. But my memory is peachy. Not only do I remember COINTELPRO, I
lived through it. I’ve seen all the tricks and every costume. I know the smell
of counterinsurgency like bacon frying on Sunday morning.
In the old days, see, I used to play at
politics a tad. Nothing so Byzantine and important as masculist politics, mind
you – just dancing with the sharks in the California legislature and
judiciary.
They were also pretenders to power, but at
least they weren’t newbies.
Back then, in rooms that the public never
sees, the gambit by Mr. Sacks and accomplices was called “closing ranks.”
Stalin called them “purges.”
The method never changes. The weak members of
an insurgency attempt to “tighten the center” of their powerbase by
marginalizing, silencing, and de-legitimizing the strong members. After three
decades of the annihilation of masculinity, in a State of complete misandry and
matriarchy, Mr. Sacks and his “leaders of men” discover their chief
adversary to be “woman-bashers” in the men’s movement.
And they are spot-on. Some of those “extremists”
that Mr. Sacks, Mr. Hanback and MANN have “profiled” -- that they might
languish in cultural prison -- have no intention of seeing the men’s movement
co-opted. Those “extremists” have watched both the Left and the Right of our
culture fall corrupt before the gods of political expediency, money, and
privilege. Our faces still drip with the loogies from that grade of “leadership.”
I pointed out on MANN that the ability of
western men to angrily confront both women and the matriarchy was necessary and
long overdue, and for Sacks and other male “leadership” to legitimize
censorship and the intimidation of other male activists was regressive in the
extreme: “. . . for not only do i believe that it is appropriate for men, with
just cause, to direct anger at women, i believe that it is currently imperative
that strong, outraged men do just that."
At which consigliare for the Boys in the Back
Room – lawyer Marc Angelucci – emerged on the board.
Gee, what a coincidence. He just happened to
be at the defense table!
Mr. Angelucci immediately exchanged my
permission for males to exhibit anger towards females for my global loathing of
anything female: “There's where we disagree. To me, directing anger at an
entire birth group is a form of bigotry.”
Of course, we did not “disagree.” I had
made no reference whatsoever to “directing anger at an entire birth group.”
I then stated, “i've seen my brothers caged,
sodomized, stomped and left for dead in the mud, and i have seen the same
treatment bestowed on the sons of the nation."
Mr. Angelucci replied: “And it's the fault
of all women . . . I'll direct my anger at the system and the misandrists and
bigots, male or female, who support it. If you direct your anger at women as a
whole, then that's your choice. I call it bigotry. You don't. I guess that
settles it.”
Again, I never imputed “fault” to “all
women,” nor did I endorse directing “anger at women as a whole.” Indeed, I
pointed out carefully that I was as critical of false masculinity in the West as
I am of the sick feminine. But it served Mr. Angelucci’s purposes to extend my
criticism of Mr. Sacks, Ms. McElroy, and MANN into the character assasination of
“bigotry” and misogyny.
Amazing, troops – it’s the EXACT same
tactic I’ve encountered in the American classroom, workplace, and home for
nigh on four decades. Now our self-appointed “masculist leaders” are using
“misogyny” against their own paratroops.
When I had the bigoted ignorance to continue
disagreeing with Mr. Angelucci, the following exchange ensued:
Ray: "i have not advocated any injury to
women, nor to any woman in particular"
Marc Angelucci: “Nor do certain factions of
the Klan advocate injury to blacks. It's irrelevant.”
Ray: “no, it's exactly relevant, otherwise
you would not have chosen those words
”thank you, mr angelucci, for comparing me
-- in a deniable, backhanded, non-actionable way, to be sure -- to the ku klux
klan
”it is very revealing of your methods
“it is likewise revealing that you find need
to expand my permission for men to express anger at women, into a generalized
hatred of women, thence into the klan
”this despite my statement to the exact
contrary
”nowhere in my statement did i say anything
about “all women” or “an entire birth group”
”those are YOUR assumptions, because they
are indispensable to your argument and purpose, and because without which your
position – and the position of certain others here – is indefensible
”please insert neither words nor sentiments
into my statements, mr angelucci, which i have not made
”that is a despicable and foul tactic”
In the midst of the domination of the
masculine by the matriarchy and its drones, Mr. Sacks and Mr. Angelucci – and
the rest of the Boys – are going to snuggle up to old Machiavelli and attempt
to broaden their political appeal by demonizing the very fire that keeps their
ovens lit, and their lights on.
Well guess what, Boys? Without those “radicals,”
you and your grand political aspirations are going to sh*tland. As in Nowhere
with a reek. Without delay.
You think you’re gonna nibble away at the
Machine?
Forty years ago I was a naïve bambino, too.
“Work within the System” the zombies all assured me. So I did, and it cut my
balls off, then laughed at me.
Then it did the same to a hundred million
other males.
I thought the Left would regain sanity, I
thought the Right would regain sanity, I thought religion and logic and rule of
law would come to its senses, stop the madness, and begin the healing.
But they didn’t. And they still don’t.
Even worse, they can’t. Instead, the Beast only grows in strength.
Your strategy of grovelling hat-in-hand before
our rulers will free the male Scapegoat?
Boys, instead of embracing the Scapegoat, you
keep kicking him off the cliff.
The Machine will ingest and eliminate you.
Tweedledum and Tweedledee are gonna eat you for breakfast.
Lawyers, web emperors, political hacks, and
third-rate “writers” cannot overturn the Hell in which Western masculinity
is now imprisoned.
We don’t need any more political brokering,
Boys. Thanks alot anyway. We’re already full to the f**king brim with
careerists.
Masculinity is broken, and so is the moral and
spiritual legitimacy of the West.
We need nothing less than a resurrected
manhood, a New Adam, and he will come from our gutters and prisons, from the
despised and outcast amongst us. Our cure, and our redemption, waits hidden in
the most marginal, unexplored, criminalized, misunderstood elements of
masculinity. The broken, the psychotic, the betrayed, the autistic, the
demonized, the voiceless – these are the shards from which a new masculinity
will be formed. They are brilliant spirits, but they burn very hot.
Instead of accusing, marginalizing, and
silencing them, you Boys should shut up and learn. You do not lead the outcasts
you have made. They lead you. They have what you lack, and hating them for it
does not liberate masculinity. Men and the West are in the mess they are
precisely because politics and “religion” are devoid of spirit.
Those misogynists you so lovingly “profile”?
Guess what? They’re all you’ve really got.
You don’t like that. So you huddle together
in consolidation of power that was never yours to begin.
Come on out of the Back Room, Boys. sh*tcan
the political alliances, the smear campaigns, the blacklisting, the scapegoating.
There’s no Masculist Empire to divvy up. All Empire is on its last legs. This
time, it ain’t about Getting Ahead. It ain’t about another Tyrannos, male or
female. This time it’s about revelation, brutal truth, astonishment and
sacrifice.
Yah, imagine that. Not glory. Not power.
Sacrifice.
If you weren’t such children, you’d
understand that the very “radicals” you seek to silence are the only thing
standing between you and the demons unleashed.
Those “radicals” are the ones keeping your
precious Towers upright.
But you Boys just keep at your whuppin’. If
you dis and betray them enough, they’ll look the other way again.
And again.
Until you’ve got nothing left but broken
bricks.
Of course, y’all are too busy defending the
helpless little ladies, writing and promoting articles stomping “woman-bashers,”
and affiliating other activists with the ku klux klan.
Busy, busy bees!
Hey, slow train’s a’comin’, Boys! Time
to pick a direction.
Don’t ever again let me catch you whipping
free on what has already been beaten.
Next time I might let them up off the ground.
Then you’d have a fair fight, and a Real Problem.
Yo, princelings: get used to dealing with what
you hate.
The harder you play at Alpha, the further you
fall in the pack.
Them’s the new rules, Boys, made by men on
fire, sweating in the halls of inclusion and justice. Keep shoving them back
into hell and you will get burned.
AH comments below ...
|
