It is entirely seemly for a young man killed in battle to lie mangled by the bronze spear. In his death, all things appear fair.
Ah yes. Those were the days when women had it bad.
The Nature Nature Scam
A recent report published by feminist 'scientists' claims that women do not do well in Maths and Science
because they are discriminated against and because society does not
provide an environment that is conducive to women flourishing in such areas. And
it is argued that women would be just as good as men in Maths and Science if
more help was provided to women.
And this, of course, is true.
If we bias the educational system so that it heavily favours girls rather than
boys (as is currently the case) and if we also do everything in our power to
discriminate against young men and put them off the whole idea of doing Maths
and Science (which we are also doing) while doing the very opposite for young women then, indeed,
women might one day end up being as good as men in Maths and Science.
After all, the environment is important.
But the truth is this.
Given the same opportunities, the same levels of assistance and the same amount
of encouragement, men will always be far more capable than women in Maths and Science and,
indeed, in nearly all other areas of intellectual endeavour.
And the evidence suggests that the only way in which women will ever reach
parity with men in the intellectual sphere is if the levels of discrimination
against men reach truly gargantuan proportions - which they might well do
judging by current trends.
The presence of polygamy in a society is often seen as a mark of female
If anything, however, it is an indication that some men are wealthy enough
to afford many wives, while the other men are either too poor or too dead to
get married; with the number of these latter men indicating with reasonable
accuracy the number of excess wives maintained by the former!
I think I now
know what the majority of women use the internet for...lol
Yes, I've just confirmed your finding.
How could women, who were saved from the horrors of life, consider
I just wanted to give a words of thanks. As a young Canadian girl who
just got an interest in history, I have found that every textbook and
teacher just seems to spew the same stuff: women had no choices, women had
no rights, etc.
For a while, I believed it, until I met my Grade 11 teacher. She was a
feminist, and, along with a student teacher fresh from the University of
Toronto (with degrees in Women's Studies and what not), taught us that
women were opressed.
I, of course, believed it. But then I noticed that during research for
an essay I did, I found that there was no mention of men, or that women
were the perpetrators.
Now, thanks to you and Manwomanmyth, my thoughts have changed.
Whenever I look at the textbooks now and see pages and pages of men
dying horrificly, I am appalled and saddened. But whenever I see a small
article on how women didn't get a Renaissance or that they were denied
full citizenship, I am skeptical.
To the mere mention of that I was completely flabbergasted.
How could women, who were saved from the horrors of life, consider
themselves oppressed, compared to what men had to face? It's ridiculous.
Unfortunately most people I know don't even consider this.
Feminism is like a plague and it is permanently affecting the minds of
those around them. It, along with many other pseudo sciences and
scientists, vomits out these ridiculous facts and theories that it is
preposterous to even consider that they really happened.
It is a shame that women have become such vile beings and that most men
have fallen hook, line and sinker for this hateful ideology.
I miss the men that would respect women and kiss your hand, or stand up
when you entered the room. I think all our forefathers are rolling in
Whenever I look at my history textbooks I have to scoff. I always think
and consider that women just are different than men; they just didn't want
to change things because it'd be too much work.
I find it a huge shame how academia and such has become dishounoured by
I fear entering university for the fear of being indoctrinated.
This is probably a long message, but either way, I just wanted to give
a special thank you. Your articles are a new kind of Enlightenment. If I
could reach through the screen and hug you, I would.
Always keep up with your amazing work.
Interview by World Net Daily ...
Here are the questions. ======================
Is it safe to say you wish to be identified only as "Angry Harry,"
and that you shield your name and personal information online? (This is
relevant to how I present your quotes, if I use them, in the article.
Please be assured that this is not a 'hit piece," ...
There is nothing strange about using a screen name on the internet.
... nor am I looking to attack the Men's Rights Movement.)
It would certainly be an unwise thing to do.
Can you give me any personal data – age, what you do, whether
you're married or were married, etc.
Age 59. Psychologist.
Would you say that there's a common demographic in the Men's Rights
No. MRAs come in all shapes and guises. Left-wing. Right-wing. Black,
White. Muslims. Christians. Jews. Atheists. Doctors. Lawyers. Police
Officers. Teachers. Academics.
Europeans. Americans. Asians.
There is no demographic that is common.
Do members run the gamut of all ages and marital statuses, or is
there a pattern?
What do you hope to achieve through your activism?
More rights for men.
What is the end goal of the MRM, if any?
More rights for men.
How do you respond to allegations that the MRM is simply based
around hatred for women, or that MRAs are bitter, lonely men lashing out
at women because they can't find partners?
I don't respond to such allegations.
Have you stopped beating your wife?
Besides which, I think that you'll find that it is feminists who hate
women - which is why they keep insisting that women behave and think like
I notice you have "register-her.com"
linked on your website. The purpose of the website seems clear enough, but
aren't you afraid about being sued for linking people on the site who've
been convicted of no crime?
As I understand it, the purpose of register-her is to highlight the
fact that it is not only men who sometimes behave badly.
Is it true that
register-her.com has contact and even travel route
information for the individuals listed?
How is this anything but an implied invitation to violence?
Then I presume that any newspaper reporting on a criminal can be
accused of the same.
Is there anything we haven't touched on that you'd like to point
1. The MRM is going to be a much bigger force than you can probably
imagine. A force much bigger than that which emanates from all the
political parties from right around the world put together.
2. If World Net Daily was serious about reducing the size, power and
cost of government then, in my view, Joseph Farah - who is a first class
activist - should spend more time attacking feminism; e.g. see, ...
Feminism is heading for oblivion - where it belongs.
It is nothing more than a hate movement propped up by numerous
self-serving groups that profit from all the hatred towards men that it
Thank you in advance. I'm interviewing Paul Elam by phone shortly,
and hope to get a couple of other interviews from folks inside the
movement. If you want to suggest anyone, please do.
NOTE TO READERS: I didn't like the tone or the implication of some of
the questions; hence my cold responses.
not a great fan but ...
I'm not a great fan of your site tho I wander over to peruse it on
I appreciate your efforts but am not very convinced about your
There is a question I want to ask and I do genuinely not intend to come
across as insulting.
Paul Elam has a banner on his site describing you as the "Father of the
Men's Movement". Any comments?
Paul is up to his usual chicanery and is doing his best to drum up
support for the MRM.
I love that man. He'll do almost anything to further the cause.
Most MRAs now distinguish between the Men's Rights Movement (MRM) and
the Men's Movement (MM) - the latter broadly being a 'consciousness' of
men's issues and a recognition of the fact that men are being treated like
dirt. And probably always have been treated in such a manner.
And Paul is just appreciating the fact that Yours Truly has been trying
to grow this consciousness via the internet for well over a decade now.
And, of course, he is trying to help my website numbers to grow.
And by giving me this lofty status, he is attempting to rouse people's
Good tactic! The man's a genius.
But, of course, Paul knows full well that MRAs of various sorts have
been around for over 100 years (e.g. Belfort Bax) and even I know MRAs in
the UK who have been active far longer than me.
But I think that it is fair to say that Yours Truly has managed, via
the internet, to alert thousands of men to the injustices that they are
facing, and I have put a huge amount of effort into doing this.
Nevertheless, I suspect that Paul is 'rewarding' me for my effort
rather than for my success.
But, to repeat myself, it is a very clever tactic.
Furthermore, if I might be so bold, it is also the case, in my view,
that this website is enormously powerful; in the sense that the text
contained within it is extremely destructive to the anti-male agenda.
Indeed, this website is all about 'power' - even the supposedly
humorous pieces, for the most part.
Put this website properly inside your head, and my guess is that you
will no longer fear what feminists and their associated victim groups
might do to you any more.
In fact, I can **assure** you that current-day feminists who know about
this website are very fearful of it - because it undermines just about
everything that they have ever said and done.
And it also exposes them and their supporters as being thoroughly
obnoxious bigots and liars or, at best, as useful idiots.
Even more alarming for them, however, is that in combination with the
activities of other MRAs - such as the great Paul Elam himself - this
website has the potential to wake up **millions** of men.
And these men are not going to be too pleased when they finally realise
how the feminists and their lackeys have been cheating and deceiving them.
In other words, feminists and their supporters are heading for serious
And by hoisting me up in the eyes of the public, Paul is simply trying
one tactic to help him ensure that they get it.
Well, that's my guess.
Who knows what he's really up to?
But he's definitely up to something!
Women are worst for snitching
I dont know whether it is me but I find that i am not allowed to
assert myself and stand up to women colleagues in the workplace when I
know they are wrong or whether they have behaved rudely to me.
I work via agencies on temping posts and I find that if i do the
above, a phone call comes through from the agency and i am told to go
home and not come back.
Most of the time , agencies have other work lined up for me so my
being let go of because of an altercation with female colleagues is
not as detrimental as would be the case if work was more scarce.
Women are worst for snitching and are expert at putting you on the
backfoot over very minor mistakes.
Is there any reason why women are favoured by employers in this
Women nowadays get jobs and/or get promoted and/or avoid
censure because employers are terrified of the possible
I have even seen military top brass bemoan the fact that they
dare not complain about the sub-standard performance of women
because they are likely to end up in court..
Same goes for the Uk's National Health Service - where some 50% of
women doctors give up on their careers, thereby leaving hospitals
and surgeries short-staffed.
Even more insidious is the fact that there is a branch of
government that can insist on a whole deluge of hugely invasive investigations
should it decide that a company might
be discriminating against women in some way.
If they have such a suspicion, the company can be in for a
mountain of aggravation and costs.
So companies make sure that they do nothing that even
appears as if men are,
somehow, getting a better deal.
And, for example, this sometimes means paying women more; just
so that they can play safe.
You would not believe the extent to which this malicious
feminist ideology has a stranglehold over companies and over
A few weeks ago, a UK police officer wrote in the Telegraph
that his police bosses would prioritise a trivial domestic
violence incident over a serious knife stabbing in the street in
order to keep getting the brownie points from their
It's that bad.
Men are being hammered everywhere.
And this will NEVER stop, because these feminist 'empires' need
to keep justifying their existence by FOREVER portraying men as
devils who are always cheating women.
It does not matter how much men accommodate to the feminist
agenda. these feminists and their allies in the abuse industry
(lawyers, therapists, domestic violence and rape groups, child
abuse organisations etc etc) MUST continue their onslaught
against men in order to CONTINUE
justifying their funding, their jobs, pensions etc etc.
The same is true for many government departments and
For example, divorce alone in the UK is a multi-billion
pound windfall for the legal profession, the social services and
the 'therapy' business.
These huge 'industries' will, therefore, drum up as much
pressure as possible to maintain a high divorce rate: i.e. they
will hype up the domestic violence statistics, the levels of child
abuse etc etc
Thus, it comes as no surprise to see that, in America, the
profession that contributes the most to the Democratic Party is
the legal profession.
The legal profession makes a fortune out of all the legal
disputes and the social disharmony that the Democrats promote.
I am one of those that has completely changed my thoughts about
women's rights and feminism. ...
Dear Angry Harry:
I wish to acknowledge that you are correct. I
am one of those that has completely changed my thoughts about women's
rights and feminism.
All this came about after the Catherine Kieu Becker case [she cut off
her partner's penis] and the initial responses to it by women. Turning her
into the victim and him into the criminal for doing something to deserve
The real turning point came after viewing The Talk's segment about that
crime. I was angry, repulsed, and regretted ever supporting women's
[The women on the panel on The Talk
(an American TV program) in August 2011 were, essentially, laughing and
jeering at a man whose penis had been cut off by his partner. The female
audience were laughing too.]
No I don't wish any harm come to women. I will not stoop to the likes
of the hosts and audience of The Talk, but I did feel like I was sucker
After being supportive of women's causes and "equality" for many years,
I never saw the way that their goals had changed. I noticed how silent the
feminists' groups were after this crime and that spoke volumes to me.
I watched your you tube videos and others' as well and have been
enlightened tremendously. Thank you.
I contacted CBS and the
executives [about The Talk] several times to no avail.
I wrote sponsors of the show, to no avail. I posted on various pages
and YouTube pages urging others write and call in. Why can't we as men get
organized better, especially after this incident and all the anger that it
caused? Women's groups would have had picket lines outside CBS. They would
have had tons of people writing to sponsors so that they'd listen to the
clout the group has.
I am very frustrated that nothing was done. That the response was so
paltry compared to what women would have accomplished.
Is there any hope? ...
I also have been noticing recently the number of criminal cases which
involved people of both genders where the woman gets probation and the men
get charged with felonies for the same crime! What's that about? Why no
I know I am preaching to the choir. I just wanted to know what can we
do better? How can we become more organized and more powerful, especially
with all the social media sites out there? Help.
listening and letting me vent.
I have spent many years - together with other MRAs - wondering how on
earth men can be motivated to stand up for their rights.
And you can forget any grandiose ideas that you occasionally read on
various men's forums regarding what needs to be done.
There is only ONE thing that we need.
And some of the reasons why it has been so hard to get the Men's
Movement going are mentioned in my piece, ...
But you can cheer yourself up with the comforting thought that our
'enemies' - of which there are many - are genuinely very worried about our
activism, and, further, that we are increasingly being supported from the
'inside' by some very important groups of people; most significantly,
police officers, soldiers and, believe it or not, some judges.
Finally, I can assure you that there will come a point when the
authorities, various media organisations and certain academic institutions
won't know what hit them.
When this happens, it's all over for the feminists and their allied
So, please keep giving us publicity.
This is what we need.
Indeed, you can even give us publicity without endorsing our stance.
For example, "There is this stupid fellow called Angry Harry (LINK) who
says that ....".
You will surely then see far more clearly just how it is that the
demonisation and disadvantaging of men and boys is worth many
billions of dollars to
many people and groups in positions
More importantly, perhaps, many of you will actually be empowered
hugely in your own lives by understanding better what is
really going on 'out
... How can anyone claim that women are oppressed when they
have so many more choices and freedoms than men
Dear Angry Harry,
I often read your website, and I often find myself infuriated as I read
it. Not because of you, of course (you're doing a wonderful thing), but
because of the blatant oppression and hatred of men that you consistently
expose. Why is nothing done about it? How can the judicial system - the
system that is supposed to protect the people - be so blatantly misandrist
and get away with it? How can the common man allow this to happen?
I was prompted to send this email after one of the latest links you
posted; about a woman who stole her ex-husband's sperm by forging his
signature (of course the misandrist courts considered this "simulating his
signature"!) and was able to claim £100,000 off him even though he didn't
even have sex with her to conceive the child - he had NO say, no choice,
in the matter! It's absolutely insane! How can this be allowed to happen?
Men's rights and choices are constantly being diminished and
undermined, while women acquire more rights, privileges, and choices all
the time. How can anyone claim that women are oppressed when they have so
many more choices and freedoms than men - the freedom to choose whether
they have a child or not without the man's consent (you'd never hear
anyone tell a woman she can't have an abortion because she "needs to
accept her responsibilities", or that she must have an abortion because
she stole some poor sod's sperm) being a particularly obvious one.
I recently read [yet another] article about "girls outshining boys" in
education, and it just makes my blood boil. I recently enrolled at
college, and the introductory booklet I was given had half a page listing
the charities available to provide financial support exclusively for
girls/women (I'd say at least 10, and it said to search for more online),
but absolutely none aimed at exclusively helping boys/men (there were two
or three aimed at all students). This is so confusing to me, if girls are
consistently achieving higher grades than boys, WHY are they consistently
given more and more support while boys continue to fell behind? The
article gave a few "reasons" for boys falling behind (obviously there was
no mention of misandry and oppression, and the forced removal of fathers
and male teachers), but if they have "reasons" where are their solutions?
I hear nothing about them making any efforts to rectify the situation!
This has been a problem for some time, and nothing has been done about -
those who are supposed to protect and serve the people are failing them
Sometimes I feel like a revolution is the only option, to overthrow the
useless, misandrist, and undemocratic government and legal system we are
currently stuck with. To establish a new government that embraces the true
values of democracy, liberty, and equal rights for all - regardless of
whether they're men, women, or mothers (who always seem to get even more
leniency than that normally granted to women who aren't mothers) - and
does a better job running a country without driving it towards mass
unemployment and ridiculous debts. This country used to be great, but
despite incredible advances in science, technology, and medicine, the
quality of our society has diminished at an alarming rate.
I've emailed you because I feel isolated; there's no one I can talk to
about this and I just want to get it all out. I try to bring it up with my
friends and they dismiss everything in a way that is rather typical of
those who have been indoctrinated ("you're just being silly, feminists are
the embodiment of everything that is good and fair!" or simply, and
commonly, "you're a misogynist!"). I don't expect you to answer my
questions, I just needed to rant. I know you know all this stuff already
(I learnt most of it from your website, after all) and I know that the
only answers to any of these questions are simply irrational feminist
hatred, political corruption, and greed. I thank you and other MRAs for
your efforts in exposing and correcting the despicable levels of hatred we
have to put up with every day in every area of our lives. I only hope I
can do more to help rectify our dire situation soon.
... the process of indoctrinating women as a voting block
has resulted in an entrenched bureaucracy in the U.S., staffed
Your website has piqued my interest. I haven't seen many like
it, and I agree with much that is described in the articles. I
think the general course of feminism has turned downward, as women
(finally..) perceive the reasons why their gender has garnered so
Much of the feminist movement was centered around politics.
Female politicians would not be voted into office unless they had
their partners-in-gender registered as voters, and eager to vote
for the advancement of women.
Since the sixties, the process of indoctrinating women as a
voting block has resulted in an entrenched bureaucracy in the
U.S., staffed with incompetents of every liberal stripe, and
female congress members who cannot be removed from their pillars
of power. The effort also resulted in an industry of tort, which
has been lucrative for both females and their attorneys.
I believe the overriding reason for feminism was to grow the
Liberals do have that agenda as a key component of their
building a power base: Big Brother is as crucial to the survival
of liberals in politics as quota hiring and set-asides for females
is for their assured employment.
California, my home state, is now a bastion of liberal
politics, with nary a sign that our current cabal will be wrested
from their thrones. The state is flat broke, our citizens are
plagued with crime, high costs of living, corruption on a grand
scale, business departures due to high operating costs, illegal
aliens taking what few jobs remain for those displaced by our
economic debacle, and women who STILL believe that they have
changed our world for the better.
Naivete seems to be their one remaining, endearing female
I too was taken in by the hysterical, misandristic feminist
rhetoric of the late sixties
Dear Angry Harry
This could be a long and rambling message which you may wish to
discard unread as you'll have received many like this and read it
I was prompted to write in response to the posts I've read at your
web site. I think it's true that I cannot disagree with anything
you've written, or said in any of the video interviews at YouTube,
and I have been saying exactly the same things for more than
twenty years, probably to my cost. All that's changed over that
time, in my understanding of the interaction of the sexes, is that
my experiences have confirmed my early suspicions and developed my
I'm a 55 year old Englishman and like many of my age I too was
taken in by the hysterical, misandristic feminist rhetoric of the
late sixties and early seventies, partly due, I'm certain, to the
weight of traditional cultural programming that is epitomised in
the word 'chivalry'; women as the 'weaker' sex, women as
disadvantaged in employment and pay etc. etc. etc.
I think I probably became aware that the truth might be at odds,
and sometimes markedly so, with what I felt I was being coerced
into accepting and saying I believed sometime in the early
eighties, certainly before 1982 and I have no doubt that the
advance of feminist thinking is almost entirely due to misplaced
notions of chivalry in the minds of men.
What else could possibly inhibit us from telling them to sit down
and shut up?
The years 1980 - 82 were seminal in terms of the development of my
thinking. I worked at that time in the art studio of a small
magazine publisher and was exposed to some very left-wing people,
some of whom were 'feminists'.
What struck me was how ugly they were, and I'm not describing any
lack of physical beauty. They were all unattractive and unpleasant
personalities and they seemed to take it for granted that those
they met in that environment shared their views. To a one they
were all verbally aggressive when I disagreed with them. Dissent
always provoked an accusation that I and any other opponents were
some sort of 'ist', usually a fascist, a sexist or a racist. The
men could be verbally vicious but always fell back when I defended
my position calmly, without becoming flustered or feeling
intimidated. The women were very different; there was a citric
acidity to their attacks, and they didn't back down unless
challenged, in effect, to a verbal dual one showed one had every
chance of winning.
One young woman in particular sticks in my memory: she was given
to wearing extremely short, loose, floaty floral dresses,
bare-legged (unusual then) with Dr Martin's shoes and no socks. It
was as though she were setting a trap with herself as the bait and
the shoes as an unpleasant surprise for anyone silly enough to
make advances. 'I'm soft and feminine (she wasn't) but I will
kick', she seemed to be saying by her manner and dress.
I married my first wife at
that time. She was all that is vile in a woman and I cannot
understand why I shackled myself to her. I think it was simply
that traditional cultural programming again: doing the right
thing, seeing a job through, keeping one's word etc. I had no need
to marry her (she was not pregnant) and certainly felt that I was
making a mistake but I felt that it would have been dishonourable
to back out. I would have saved myself a great deal of trouble had
I done so.
She was in every sense a
toxic female and with a vicious, criminal nature. She was adept at
fomenting a quarrel and then eliciting the sympathy and support of
those who knew us,
even my own parents. She was a spiteful and devious bitch who
stole from me and left me, for the fourth dramatic time, when I
made it very clear that the jig was finally up. I lost everything,
due in part to her deceit and dishonesty, but had the satisfaction
of seeing her get absolutely nothing from me that she had not
already stolen and secreted away, unknown to me at the time.
I have never recovered
economically from the losses I sustained through marriage to her.
The last I heard she was living in her fourth house since leaving
me, all bought jointly with men she lured into abusive
relationships then kicked out, except the first; that was bought
with money she stole from me.
My present wife is vastly different, and I am an
extremely lucky man, but she possesses many of the faults of her
sex; she is distracted by childish, glittery things, her taste in
food is for the comforts of her childhood and she dislikes almost
all adult foods, including fish that isn't battered or mashed and
breadcrumbed or mixed or covered with potato etc, shellfish,
chicken on the bone etc etc etc.
She happily admits that the wrapping of a present, with
ribbons, bows, sparkles and in a glittery little carrier bag of
the sort sold for a fiver in shops selling glittery and childish
tat, is more important to her than the present itself. She is the
breadwinner, and has been for most of our time together (I have no
income at present - there is no niche for me in our feminised
economy) yet she does not behave in the way most men do as
breadwinners; she cannot put my priorities before her own, so we
end up with two, three or four, or more of almost everything, with
cutlery and crockery and other things we will never use but her
car had to be sold because the money that would have got it
through the MOT was frittered away on trivia, the garden remains
unfinished and essential storage for unimportant things like
printer paper, stationery, pens etc, and my photographic
equipment, our tools (they're for the house and so on so not just
mine) and so on remains on the wish list.
The rented house we live in is totally inadequate and
I'm to blame because I left the choice up to her - that's her
argument. I can see why she chose it: It has a faux cottagey look
and the kitchen is fitted with units of a distinctly doll's house
furniture appearance. The all too obviously printed tile pattern
of the cushion flooring was good enough to deceive her into
believing it was a quarry tiled floor. She thought the place
enchanting, and still does.
I could go on and on but I'll end here. Every thing you have
written about women is borne out by my experiences of them and I
know that a society controlled by women cannot possibly exist. My
opinions developed long before the MRM found a voice on the
internet and I'm sure that's true of many others. Thankfully the
WWW, another male development, allows us to exchange ideas and
move towards sanity.
Thanks for taking the trouble to read this far.
men are naturally superior
My name is A and I'm a 24 year old girl from California. I
wanted to send you an email to show my support, especially on your
views on the inability for women like me to be equal.
My belief is that it is impossible for me to be equal because
men are naturally superior. All men are better than me and I am
second to all men. I think feminism is a total lie because I
respect and embrace the superiority of men.
I am here to serve men and be used by them as they see fit.
Unlike many people who seem to hold these views, I did not come
to them because of any religious belief (I am not religious) or by
any kind of belief in the modesty of women. I consider myself a
slut, I like to sleep around and dress in revealing clothes. I do
not like relationships and at the moment I am not interested in
marriage or having kids. This does not preclude me from
understanding my place as a girl though. This is how I have always
thought of myself and I have been lucky enough to know some men
that have reinforced my beliefs.
I am not here to give men problems, I am not here to make
demands of them, I am not here to take advantage of them. That is
not my role. It is an honor to be able to email a man like you who
understands what I mean. All men are great men by their very
nature, but you are a very great man. Thank you, and I hope to
hear back from you.
I believe that Feminism has given Cluster B women yet more
I have recently found your site, and I rather like it. I admire
your style and sense of humor. I don't see you using the verbal
violence, bullying tactics, and/or vulgar and demeaning language that
some of the other men in the MRM use or Feminists who attack your work
in this infantile way. Instead, a lot of your observations are very
astute, original and your arguments clearly come from a balanced and
educated mind which make them stand out all the more and is wise of
you to do. No where can I conclude that you hate women as you are
accused of. I clearly see Feminism is validly under attack with you
and not all women.
I myself have no use for Feminism.
Whatever good it did do is long over, and the damage it has caused
to Men, Women, Children, Family and Society has overshadowed it. As a
matter of fact, I don't even know what they are still trying to get
at. I wonder if they clearly know themselves or if they are just a
bunch of punch drunk women swinging madly for no reason as it seems to
be the case.
I believe that Feminism has given Cluster B women yet more
pathological power and that has been one of it's biggest downfalls.
Their word is now taken face value as true because they are master's
of spinning Feminism for their own gain. As if a Cluster B woman would
care about another woman's plight anyway and join a group to fight for
I like as well that you do not fall under the spell of treating the
Cluster B's with velvet gloves, excuse or justify their behavior or
worse yet drum up sympathy and compassion for them. I find that you
are among the few Psychologists or Mental Health Professionals who
doesn't do the above. I admire your strengths and ability to stand up
for what is right on both fronts by speaking out about it, and I don't
believe that your endeavors are easy pursuits either. Thank you for
an amazing website ...
Firstly, can i just ask you not to post my name up on your site (well,
you're not likely to post this its just a thanks) - and I'm not going to
insult you either!! Wouldn't dream of it.
Thank you for such an
amazing site, i have no idea how i will find the time to read it all, but
I have read a few already, and i do find it massively depressing.
Mainly because as a woman, I don't want to feel useless and obsolete -
well, who does right?
But i am hugely aware of the misandry in the world, particularly here
in the UK which is totally looked over by seemingly everyone.
Laughing at jokes about men which if the joke was on women - it would
be an unholy uproar.
I hate double standards.
would like to say that although I have called myself a feminist in the
past, I do'nt think i was naming myself right!! and I didnt ever want to
be associated with the hideous witches who are f*cking up family here in
I just wanted to say i appreciate your work on your sites and i
will continue to read and educate myself, and i will do my best to counter
the insanity that surrounds me.
If i ever hear women bashing men I just hold them to task on it and
they are usually left with their mouths flapping as they don't even think
how it could be sexist or revolting behaviour.
More power to you
'interview' for newspaper article ...
I stumbled across your website when researching for
an article I have been commissioned to write for a Sunday newspaper.
The piece is a result of the Richard Keys and Andy Gray scandal (two
very renowned and respected British Sports Broadcasters being fired from
their £1.7 million a year jobs as a result of joking that a female
linesman didn't know the offside rule).
My article is investigating the 'Because we're worth it' generation of
women, who don't want equality, but superiority over men.
I was wondering whether I could ask you a few questions regarding
women being sexist and how you thought this was impacting society?
Thank you so much.
>Firstly, what inspired you to set up your website?
A growing awareness that we were being lied to a great deal by various
powerful left-wing politically-corrected groups who were, essentially,
seeking to profit themselves by stirring up hatred towards men and boys.
The increasing onslaught against them in the family and in the traditional
educational system was one of the most obvious manifestations of this.
>There seem to be a lot of angry men out there.... Do you think
this is a recent revolution, or in your opinion has this feeling of
resentment towards women been a long time coming?
Recent; for the most part.
>Do you feel the support for men in society is growing?
>What do you see the relationship between the genders like in 5
Not much different from today.
>Do you believe men will have regained their position of authority
What position of authority in society? Women have always been hugely
powerful throughout society as far as I am aware.
Far more powerful
than men, in my view. (Apart, perhaps, from those very few men at the
>What do you believe is the appropriate role for men and women in
I am not worried about what roles men and women choose to have in
society. Women can do as they please as far as I am concerned.
hate feminism because it is a thoroughly nasty ideology promoted from the
top by some very devious and wicked people who are persistently seeking to
stir up trouble within their own societies so that they can enrich and
empower themselves; e.g. see, ...
wanted to say a big "Thank You" for your site, and all the hard work you
obviously put into it.
I am a woman, yes, but I'm also a mother of
two sons, 23, and 20 years of age. I started up our organization five
months ago, in response to the experience my youngest son (and thus, our
whole family) is going through since he was arrested and jailed on charges
to do with having "underage sex with a minor".
One of the hardest
parts for him to deal with, as well as the rest of us, was the fact that
this girl was his girlfriend...and that she lied about her age.
She presented herself to us all as being 17, at the time, my son was 17 as
well. Now, 2 1/2 years later, we find out she was 14 years old. Let me
tell you, she did NOT look anywhere close to 14 in my eyes...
does this have to do with you, you must be asking?
Just wanted to
show my support, and say that today when I found your blog, I realized it
was most likely the ONLY blog I've found that tells the truth about these
matters. Although the subject I was reading under was "False Rape Claims",
it still holds some pertinent information that is relevant to our cause.
Nowhere else have I been able to read, and completely agree with
the claims that women (and girls) in increasing numbers, and of
increasingly younger ages are perpetuating these crimes, with full and
complete knowledge and understanding of the consequences.
It is a
travesty of justice that females are still (in this day and age) believed
in all circumstances to be the "victim" in these cases at all costs, even
when it was obviously consensual. Lawyers, lawmakers, and law enforcement
alike still cling to the old addage of anyone of the female sex as being
the "weaker" or "gentler" sex, and males, unconditionally being the
Even when its put in the faces of the "powers that
be", they choose to deny and ignore it.
One needs only check out
the social networking pages these days to see 14, 15, and 16 year old
girls representing themselves to young men as much older. Here in
California, the age of consent is 18 years old.
So, my son has
been sitting in jail for 5 months now, while this girl has gone on to lie
to other young men, continuing her behavior, and with the ways our laws
are set up, will never see a day of personal responsibility or
consequences for herself.
Thanks again for putting the word out
there on these kinds of crimes. What you are doing is invaluable to those
who read you!
As a young man, I feel duty bound to say that it's not just women who
think your blog is vile.
I do too. You make me feel ashamed on behalf of our gender, who are
clearly responsible for the oppression of women throughout history.
Hoping you reject bigotry soon,
a young man, your experience and learning are somewhat limited at the
You need to wake up, and grow up.
Besides which, I have never
suggested that men were not mostly responsible for 'oppression'.
In other words, I suggest that you try to think when you read.
You have been indoctrinated and brainwashed all your life, and my guess
is that, as a result, you immediately assume that anyone who opposes
feminism is a 'bigot'.
But it is you who is the bigot; not me.
Peruse my website at your leisure, and see if you can find
anywhere where I claim - or imply - that men are
not responsible for 'oppression'.
You will not find such a claim.
Indeed, you will find that your accusation has no substance at all.
In other words, it is you who is the bigot - and who makes bigoted
It is you who jumps to bigoted conclusions without evidence.
You have been conditioned - like Pavlov's dogs - to react with
negativity and without thinking towards anybody who does not follow the
creed that you have been brainwashed into believing.
Which leads to bigotry.
... a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing
from his own wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her
own opinions and prejudices. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigot
bigoted - blindly and obstinately attached to some creed or opinion
and intolerant toward others; wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
... That's you!
should rape researchers use polygraph tests? ...
In relation to your recent musings about compiling accurate data on
false-allegations: Would not the routine polygraphing of men accused of
rape offer an accurate insight into how many of them have been falsely
A polygraph test, when performed properly, is extremely accurate.
If I were an academic, conducting such a study, I'd choose to polygraph
a cross-section of men accused of rape. I'd then offer the same test to
their accusers. For those men who have been falsely accused and pass the
test, I would not find it unsurprising if their accusers refused to take a
polygraph test. Those women who've been genuinely raped would be more
likely to take the test, and pass. Whereas their rapists would be unlikely
to participate. I think you can see where I'm going with this.
Another idea would be to offer a polygraph to all men who've been
convicted of rape. The results would no doubt provide interesting and
Just my two-penneth worth, but I dispute the assertion that it's
difficult to obtain accurate data on false allegations.
Yes, statistically, I suppose that you could add some useful data to
false allegation research by employing polygraphs.
However, I suspect that in most cases the main issue would be to do
with consent rather than with what actually happened, and I am not quite
sure how a polygraph would be able to sort out all the complications.
For example, ....
"Did you at any time throughout the situation believe that she did not
want you to have sex with her?"
Well, this could sound like rape.
However, I suspect that it is often the case that a man thinks that she
does not want sex to begin with but that, later on, she appears to have a
No doesn't always mean No.
Furthermore, it would be easy for a woman to pick on some particular
point in a scenario wherein it would be true to say that she did not give
the impression that she wanted sex.
For example, a woman might be resisting sex all evening but then change
Well, I could go on all night with this, but I think that a little
thought will show that the issue of consent is too much of a problem.
And an enormous amount of bogus interpretation and bias from the
researchers could easily enter the process of determining whether or not a
rape had occurred.
After all, the polygraph test does not involve a discussion, it
revolves around asking very simplistic questions.
Furthermore, as time goes by, both accusers and defendants will start
to rehash their memories in accordance with what they want to think. And
so by the time that the researchers get their hands on them, the idea that
polygraphs of their statements will be valid seems untenable.
Polygraphs are probably of some value when it comes to simple questions
such as, Did you do this? Did you do that?
But when it comes to questions concerning complex beliefs and attitudes
- particularly in reference to past events. I cannot see them being very
Indeed, when thinking about consent, it is even possible to imagine
realistic situations wherein he thought that he was raping her, but she
And it is also possible that they BOTH thought that he was raping her,
and yet this is what she wanted.
And, more commonly perhaps, neither of them thought that he was raping
her, and yet she didn't want sex.
And then you would have to look at all the various ins and outs, and at
how they changed with time throughout the course of the interactions.
My point is that the whole area is fraught with horrendous difficulties
and complexities when it comes to understanding what went on in the minds
of the people involved.
And then there is all the posturing, the posing, the game-playing and
the little misunderstandings that typically go on in MOST of these
All in all, therefore, I suspect that polygraph tests in MOST of these
situations are not going to get us that much closer to the truth - even
for research purposes.
Are the powers-that-be setting men up? ...
Having read every single article twice now (that I'm
aware of) I can safely say that I agree with pretty much everything you
have said and have confirmed many notions that I have had at the back of
my mind for years.
Except for one.
As you have mentioned
there are many groups that have a vested interest in stirring up hatred
towards men in pretty much every aspect of life.
well planned advancement on the lives of the people have left a question
burning the back of my head for some time which none of your articles
seems to address apart from saying that the rising MM is unstoppable,
unfortunately I didn't find that exhaustive of the issue. The question as
Are we, men, playing into their hands by forming the MM?
Have they already taken the reaction of the men they are marginalising
into consideration and planned accordingly?
Yes, is the answer to your question; because the more problems that
they cause to men (and to the population in general) the more do
governments and government workers manage to get more power, jobs,
As such, the growth of the MM, which is definitely going to increase
the number of societal problems in the short term, could well have been
something that they were quite happy to see happening; and, as you
suggest, perhaps they did believe that the MM would play right into their
However, I get the distinct impression that the internet empowers
the people sufficiently well to enable them to put a stop to their heinous
This was very obvious after 9/11 and throughout the first three years
after the invasion of Iraq.
For three years the Bush administration (and the Pentagon) just could
not see how powerful the internet was becoming.
For example, I was truly gobsmacked over the hopeless attempt by the
Pentagon to deceive us over the incidents surrounding Jessica Lynch's
supposed 'escape' from the Iraqis.
They also seemed totally unaware that 'unfavourable' photographs and
films from Iraq could so easily end up on the internet within hours.
They made blunder after blunder.
Quite clearly, they thought that the media coverage of this war could
be controlled just like it was a decade earlier; with the first Gulf War -
where, for example, the Americans got away with spinning a whole load of
false allegations about the behaviours of Iraqi soldiers; e.g. that they
were bayoneting babies in Kuwaiti nurseries.
And there were so many other lies and deceits emanating from the White
House and Downing Street after 9/11 that were, clearly, going to be
exposed via the internet, that it became obvious to me that those in power
were miles behind people like me! LOL!
But, then again, I was living in cyberspace and they were living 'out
My point is that, quite clearly, they are not now as all-powerful and
as all-seeing as they once were; though they are desperately trying to
regain this power by increasing massively their close surveillance over
But, no longer, for example, can the president so easily give a nod and
a wink to a group of mainstream media proprietors and, through this,
manipulate the news and the opinion makers; because the internet remains
And so the upshot is that while they can now watch us very closely,
they cannot actually control the flow of information to the public very
Loosely speaking, therefore, they have gained enormous power because of
the internet (and other technologies) but they have also lost power
because of it.
The good news, however, is this.
Their increase in power comes from their increased ability to monitor.
But increasingly monitoring the MM simply means that the MM will get
further inside the heads of those who are doing the monitoring!
And so, if you like, the MM (which I see as a 'consciousness' - one
that is building up in cyberspace) will eventually invade the minds of
millions of those who work for government - at all levels.
It is our 'way in', if you like.
And so while it is true that, as you suggest, the growth of a men's
movement might well have been something that they thought would play into
their hands, I suspect that the internet has scuppered this hope - and
that they now feel quite threatened by the MM.
Well, those who are really aware of it will be.
And I can assure you that some of my own favourite activist targets are
accommodating very nicely - but slowly - to my 'demands'.
Just little me.
So can you imagine how big a threat they will face as the MM grows?
And so they will gradually back down.
(These people might be self-serving, but they are not stupid!)
I promise you that the MM (this consciousness) is going to be huge and
And I am not just saying this.
About four weeks ago, for example, I wrote to a high-court judge who
had irritated the hell out of me over an injunction that he had issued
concerning something which I cannot mention.
In a nutshell, and because I cannot give any specifics, I yelled at him
as if he was a child. LOL! And I called him all sorts of names; "arrogant
twerp" being one of them, LOL! x 2
But my point is this.
I would not dream of doing such a thing unless I had him over
Because no way am I going to end up in serious legal trouble!
In other words, I would not have done such a thing unless I was
confident about my own 'power' with regard to the particular matter that
was being addressed.
Just little me; knowing the internet, and knowing how powerful it can
be for activist purposes - and letting him know it.
The guy might be brilliant at law, but he clearly had no clue about
what is going on out here, nor about what can be done over the internet.
And I 'won' - just by showing him what could be done should he,
perchance, continue to offend me so.
I recently gave a more specific example of this kind of 'power' over at
MND, which Google threatened to delist from its NEWS section as a result
of an article written by someone over there that was considered
'inappropriate' in some ways.
I reprint here what I wrote to Mike, ...
... fear not, Mike, for if MND were deGoogled, I am sure that, let us
say, three of us combined, could play merry hell with Google ... and that
Google would soon change its tune.
Indeed, it would provide great
practice in Activism.
Is Google too powerful? Yes
infringing copyright? Yes.
Is Google making money from hate sites?
Is Google making money from people calling women sluts? Yes
Is Google selling sleaze? Yes
Is Google biased against
Is Google invading people’s privacy? Yes
And no-one in his right mind at Google is going to suffer all that
[continued negative publicity and aggravation] just for the sake of
unblocking a ‘lil old site like this one.
They’d be fired!
So, I reckon that you must not worry too much about Google.
little – but not too much – because I feel sure that we could turn the
matter round in the event of a de-listing.
Thus, people with power and/or money are, in fact, quite vulnerable to
serious activism on the internet - even from just a handful of committed
So, how can the MM not succeed?
Furthermore, at some stage, the mainstream media are bound to open up
the doors to the MM because they will lose their audience and, hence,
their revenue if they continue to fail to address issues of concern to
And, in some small way, they are already doing this via their comments
And so, in summary, while it might be true that government was
initially quite happy to sit back and watch the MM begin to grow, because
this would give the powers-that-be further justification for various forms
of 'oppression' (something which has, in fact, happened as a result of
activity by F4J) my own belief is that the internet has turned the tables
Well, let's hope so!
western women are ignorant ...
I am a 15 year old American girl.
I think that your website is not only entertaining, smart, and eye
opening, but empowering for both men and women. It's obvious that most
Western women are not only extremely emotionally disturbed, violent, and
ignorant, but they feel entitled and they are not able to think critically
It saddens me that many of my peers are already calling themselves
"feminists", claiming to be victims, and complaining about the injustices
I don't want to waste any of your time, but I would like to thank you
for getting the facts out there in an entertaining and awesome way.
On prenuptial agreements in the UK ...
ive been reading your website on and off for about a year now. And
although i dont agree 100% with what you say, i agree with most of it.
Anyway, i got my own business which ive built from the ground up. I own
a home, which i work incredibly hard to pay the bills on. Im 32 years old,
single and honestly dream of the day of being happily married to a
beautiful woman who fills my valuable free time with romantic weekends
away and long walks through the countryside. But alas i know this will
I despise the majority of english women. And the ones i dont are
already taken. I thought that a nice eastern european woman would make my
dream come true one day. And a prenuptual would end my paranoia of loosing
everything ive worked so hard for.
Pre-nup agreements in the UK are worthless. They are just a way of
lawyers making money - and divorce judges do not even need to look at
them, let alone enforce them.
In other words, they are well and truly worthless.
Women are permitted to break their marriage contracts and any prior
agreements with impunity - the whole idea being to make men extremely
reluctant to marry and to destabilise established relationships by
continually offering women numerous incentives to break them.
Finally, please do not delude yourself when it comes to finding a 'a
nice eastern european woman' because if you are living in the UK together
her mind will eventually be poisoned by the feminist-dominated media, by
the government, and by other women.
In the UK, even your children will be trained to see you as unworthy.
Where have all our rights gone? ...
I have been posting lately to the comments section of a blog called
"The Motherlode", hosted by the New York Times. It reaches a broad
audience because it is hosted by such a prominent news site.
I have dated women in the New York area whose views have been shaped by
The Motherlode's misandric leanings.
Its main theme is that men don't do "their fair share" of housework.
But lately, women viewing "The Motherlode" for a fix of man-hating have
been getting an alternative point of view in the comments section :)
I believe that this sort of grass-roots, hand-to-hand, post-to-post
combat is an important means of awakening men to what has become of the
rights they held dear since modern humans first appeared on the planet
150,000 years ago; the right to the fruits of one's labor; the right to
see and influence one's children. All largely stripped of us in the west,
in the last 40 yrs.
It is dissapppointing to realize that the rights that men in my family
took for granted for thousands of years are not available to me.
Keep writing those comments! - because I can ***assure*** you that they
are helping to wake up a 'sleeping giant'.
In response to two questions that cropped up recently ...
1. "Are you gay?" - "Why do you keep emphasizing that gays have had a
positive influence on men's freedoms?"
No, I am not gay, but my view is that it was gay activists, mostly, who
helped to dilute society's traditional expectations that all men had to
behave like 'real men' in order to be men.
And I am old enough to remember a time wherein gentle men - perhaps
those who were opposed to violence - or weak men were regarded as non-men;
and, probably, gay.
To be a man, you had to be tough.
And if you were not tough, then you were regarded as being less than a
(Witness also the derogatory way in which computer geeks were treated
and portrayed not so long ago.)
Gay activism has helped enormously to loosen the powerful constraints
that bound men into certain roles and it has reduced the pressure on men
to behave in a very limited and strongly circumscribed manner.
As such, heterosexual men have benefitted enormously from gay activism;
though I accept that some gay activism has had the opposite effect.
2. "Will the furore in the UK over MPs' expenses make any difference in
the long term?"
Furthermore, as I have often said, the forces stacking up against
governmental powers are going to continue increasing well into the future,
and the public revelations about MPs' expenses and their dishonesty is
just one example of this.
And these particular revelations over their expenses will assist this
process even further - because they will help the public to see just how
dishonest and deceitful are so many of those who hold high positions.
But we must go much further - because it is not just the
politicians who are corrupt.
We have civil servants and academics lying through their teeth in order
to build their empires, women's victim groups forever lying about their
various abuse figures, and so on.
There is much to be done!
I also get the sense that politicians (and some judges) are beginning
to wake up to the fact that they are supposed to be on the side of the
people, not on the side of the executive.
And if we, as MRAs, can keep on pushing and pushing these people to do
their jobs properly - part of which is to protect us from corruption,
dishonesty and injustice at the hands of the state - then we will go far
in achieving our aims.
After all, the whole point of having politicians and a parliament was
to protect the people from being subjected continually to the whims of
those who presumed to rule over them.
The various kings and their cronies were supposed to be made to answer
to the people via their parliaments!
But we seem to have had the very opposite happening recently - with
governments and their officials now colluding with politicians to
interfere with and to control just about everything that we do.
Can't do this. Can't do that. Must do this. Must do that.
And they are also taking 50% of our money!
And this is because the kings and the politicians have joined forces to
form a new ruling class.
When do you ever hear politicians (especially left-wing politicians)
arguing for lower taxes, fewer restrictions, fewer laws, fewer
And so, of course, MRAs must continue to do their very best to
undermine them and, indeed, to undermine everything and everybody that
causes men to be disadvantaged.
And with regard to the scandal over MPs' expenses, I do not really have
any doubt that MRAs have, in fact, had a hand in bringing it to the
I cannot actually haul out a string of evidence to support this
particular view, but I do have a very good nose when it comes to sniffing
out the various links that are connecting different groups and ideas
together (organisms!) and I can definitely sense that there is a greater
awareness of men's issues unfolding from left to right on the political
spectrum - at least, here in the UK.
And, in my view, this is currently manifesting itself via a growing
anger towards those who are seen as being responsible for all the
And it is this anger that, in my view, helped to spur the Telegraph
onward in its attacks on all those MPs who had been fiddling their
This would not have happened even one year ago.
This anger is coming from somewhere. And my belief is that the many
thousands of comments received by journalists and columnists (a good
proportion of which are now coming from MRAs) are stirring up the emotions
and lowering the respect levels on many fronts.
In the near future, therefore, I do expect to see some politicians
start talking about men's issues, though I imagine that they will do this
rather obliquely to begin with (because politicians and media folk are
positively deluged with female histrionics whenever they dare to talk
about concerns that men might have; e.g. see
Indeed, yours trulyhas been emailing
various lofty folk recently to warn them of what is in store for them if
they continue to ignore men's issues - and I continually remind them that
80% of political activists are male, and that MRAs are nowadays getting
through to these activists.
The implications of what I say to them are, generally, very simple. If
you want to remain popular - if you want your profession to be held in
high regard - if you want your organisation to be profitable - then stop
bashing men and start supporting them - or you are going to find yourself
coming under increasing pressures of various kinds.
This is exactly what the feminists, the gays and the blacks did - with
much success - and this is exactly what MRAs should be doing, and are
So, Yes, the expenses scandal will definitely have long-term
implications, but it will likely be just a small part of the process
through which the government - and the feminists - are finally put firmly
in their place.
The reason is simply "Affirmative Action". Period.
Women used to be the butt of jokes and commercials on television, because
they are inferior and acted that way. THEN they were given not only equal
rights, but superiority in our cultures....and it's not like they deserve
what they got.
... I found it interesting that last night, as I was looking at the
mail form I was sent to renew my driver license, on the form it basically
said "If you are a male between the ages of...you need to register with
the Military Service". Hmmm. NOT women. Only men. Right...women are
Women have become incredibly abusive, and are wallowing in the power
corrupts frame of mind without even knowing it. Men are looked at as boobs
because the women can get away with it. Men used to do it to
women....women now do it to men.
... I work with women who have to ask each other all the time if they are
making the right decisions. Used to be that you needed to. But I could
make a joke about how many women it takes to get a project off the
ground...all of them.
I'm not impressed with how weak women are where I work now, and
several places I've worked in the past. They can say anything they want,
but we guys have to keep out mouths shut for fear of reprisals. And if you
think about how many men have lost their jobs here in the US, millions,
and that there has been a major net gain for women during the same time,
it is obvious what the issue is.
... And the media also hypes women who are in the military, and like to
say "Our men and WOMEN in the Service are heroes", etc.
... From the stories about men being accused of rape, and the women go
free even after it is revealed that they lied and ruined men, to the many
women teachers lately being arrested for having sex with young males and
get off with lighter sentences than men get when they do the same thing.
The fact of the matter is that women are just men with vaginas. They
are as violent, conniving, hateful, aggressive and on and on.
... Until we men get over the fairy tale view of these evil creatures
(not all of women are...necessarily) being sweet smelling, nice and decent
people, we ARE going to be viewed as unnecessary and decadent. Women are
hateful, and depressed. And what do hateful, resentful depressed people
do? They bash others who aren't.
Western culture has made a mockery of what men are, how they are
viewed, and what their role is. I am a tough male, make good money, can
outsmart ANY woman, and I have senses, decency, and respect. I am not your
typical male, so I think I can see objectively what is going on.
... We've let this sh*t go on long enough. Please keep up the great work.
It is through sites like yours that men are understanding that they are
being abused, used, and played. We ARE the stronger sex, smarter, more
decent than women can ever be.
Take the gloves off from the shackles of Affirmative Action, and you'll
see men come to life.
Thank you. Nice piece! Much appreciated.
But I do fundamentally disagree with your notion that "Women used to be
the butt of jokes and commercials on television." - because they were no
more the butt of jokes than were men.
Indeed, I remember when the wailing feminists here in the UK managed to
get Benny Hill off the air (in the 70s, I think) because he was - or so
they alleged - 'misogynistic', that my eyes began to open up to the
utterly mindless spitefulness and stupidity of feminist women.
After all, Benny Hill clearly worshipped women. His entire humour was
based on himself continually being portrayed as a complete buffoon who
worshipped the very ground upon which women walked.
As such, the idea that he hated women could not be more ludicrous.
And, just as now, we could see TV programme after TV programme
portraying men as wife beaters, murderers, child molesters, perverts - the
whole gamut of badness - and here were the feminists proclaiming
that women were the ones being portrayed in a negative light by the TV
programmes because of Benny Hill!
It was utterly ridiculous.
But the mainstream media began to accommodate to these revolting women
because they were terrified of the ongoing bad publicity and the wailing
hysteria that was being generated by them.
But, to repeat myself, I see no evidence that women were portrayed
particularly negatively in the olden days when compared to men.
It is true that women were sometimes portrayed as helpless in some way
- e.g. when it came to fixing the car, or figuring out where the oil went.
But, firstly, this was very mild humour based on the TRUTH and there was
nothing malicious about such humour and, secondly, this was exactly how
women, themselves, wished to be portrayed - because it got them out of
doing certain chores and because it made men feel protective towards them.
Indeed, women were (and are) enhanced in the eyes of men when they are
helpless or incapable, but men are not enhanced in the eyes of women when
they are portrayed as such.
And the feminist trick is to hide this truth when they complain about
the way in which women were portrayed compared to men.
Furthermore, and for example, fifty years ago, if you portrayed a
particular woman as being unable to cook, then this would have been an
insult - but it would not have been an insult to portray a man in such a
Similarly, if you had portrayed a man as being unable to lift a heavy
load, then this would have been an insult - but it would not have been an
insult to portray a woman in such a way. (On the contrary, such a
portrayal would have suggested to men that women should be helped when it
came to such chores.)
Indeed, women make their living out of being weak.
It is, in fact, their strong point.
And they know it.
This is why, for example, they always try to look 'vulnerable' in some
way; e.g. via their clothing, their make-up and their shoes.
And so when, for example, you see women being portrayed as helpless in
some way in some old film footage, this was very much consistent with how
millions of women wanted to be perceived at the time.
So, please forget this idea that women were the main butts of all the
jokes fifty years ago - because it is not true. Further, the mainstream
gender jokes from 50 years ago were extremely mild and good-natured. And
there was just no way that any mainstream media organisations would have
gotten away with insulting women.
Women might find some of the humour insulting now but, at the time,
they did not feel this way about it.
It is only because numerous women nowadays get power by being
permanently offended, and because so many of them think that they are so
superior that one should never make jokes about them, that even the
mildest of humour can send them into a menstrual rage.
So, please get out of your head this notion that women were portrayed
worse than men in the olden days, because this is definitely not the case.
PS Even in Roman times, death was often seen as a fitting punishment
for insulting someone's mother - no matter how lowly she might be.
PPS The Daily Mail article does indeed go off colour when it comes to
talking about why men have ended up in this unhappy state of affairs - but
I posted it up mostly because it listed so many examples of misandry.
Subject: Testimony from a Female Who's Been Around the Block &
I'm a female, been around and you've got a lot of TRUE stuff to say
about my (99.9%) of my sisters. Stumbled upon your website and found it
most interesting. Would it be possible for you to cite more sources - not
links? That's too much trouble, I know.
I grew up with four brothers a Mom and Dad who was away working
(necessity) most of the year: Mom was it for the most part and did one
hell of a job because SHE WAS STRONG, focused and no pathetic wimp. She
was my hero. We all turned out well, highly educated and accomplished
except for my sister who hates men but loves her Ph.D (fat, bitter and
I love men, understand them and have a terrific son of my own. Because
I grew up with 4 brothers whom I loved, I learned about men and how they
think. Men are so basic, so uncomplicated, so logical! Treat a man with
respect and he will slay dragons for you; I know; I've been there - many
Harry, I never played games because I'm strong, confident and celebrate
the differences: I adore men; they adore me - as it should be. To this
day, (and I've been a jock forever) I can sincerely ask a guy at the gym
if I "can borrow his muscles" to remove heavy weights - which I can't
because I'm a woman and can't life 200 lbs (hello?) which is twice my
weight. We understand each other.
Women are pathetic weaklings and moochers. They zero in on the guy,
stop sex after marriage and take him for all he's worth. I don't think
they will ever change; they're too stupid. If they had any brains, they'd
stop giving it away: so simple. Let a man be a man and work for it; don't
take the challenge away from them!
Men have given up their kingdoms for the women they love and built them
monuments like the Taj Mahal. Why? The women were smart.
You go, Harry! And you may use my name.
men are always the perpetrators ...
Firstly I have been enthralled by your website since first stumbling
across it a few days ago. Perhaps I should explain how I came to find it.
I work as Crisis Outreach worker in a rough part of Melbourne. Its
strictly short-term case management and revolves mainly around housing
issues. I grew up in the UK and moved out here a few years ago.
I was looking for any services that could help one of the families I
currently work with. It’s a family consisting of 2 adults (male & female)
and 5 children under 16 with another one the way.
The thing is that the father of the children has an intellectual
disability, is completely illiterate and is regularly physically,
emotionally and verbally abused by the female family member. She controls
all the family income and his life is not dissimilar to that of a servant.
When I was told of this my instant reaction was to call the national
“Family Violence” line to get him and his children out of the situation
I had recently attended the “mandatory for all people working in
welfare” family violence training and was pretty sure of the answer I got.
(Incidentally when I attended the training, the women giving the
training made it very clear that the framework was written for women and
that it could not be used for men escaping domestic violence. When
challenged they said that it was the way it was and it was not going to be
When I called the number the woman on the end of the line chortled as I
listed the abuse this poor man was going through. This number let us not
forget is the line women who are fleeing domestic violence call.
She then said, and I quote “well we can’t help him”. I then asked if I
had called the Family Violence line or Women’s Line. She answered that
“men are always the perpetrators of violence” and that was that.
There only suggestion was to call the men’s referral line which I did.
The men’s referral line stated that all they could do was offer him
generalist counseling. They stated that “they work with perpetrators of
violence, not victims”
I’m blown away on so many levels.
Sadly the word family seems to now exclude men, unless of course they
are perpetrators of violence. So many more things, I’m reeling!
of this of course will be no news to you.
Just thought I would share my thoughts with you.
Regards from down under
Will a 2010 Conservative government make a difference? ...
It looks fairly likely that we will have a conservative government at
the net (2010) election and I wondered if you think it will benefit men's
There are some encouraging signs - they seem to be broadly talking
about favouring marriage and the family as the basis for society. They
seem to be broadly criticising political correctness.
Do you think they will go all the way and address the many issues
affecting men? (or is that still too much to hope for?)
However, do you think there might be the drawback of the architects of
misandry in the labour government not being around to attack any more -
will they get away with it in other words? Will people be interested in
attacking past governments for their policies?
It looks fairly likely that we will have a conservative government
at the next (2010) election and I wondered if you think it will benefit
I doubt that the Conservatives will win the next election UNLESS they
support 'big government'.
In other words, the conservatives are unlikely to make much difference
even if they do win the next election.
So, in a nutshell, I do not really expect that a conservative victory
would bring much in the way of benefit to men, but I do think that it
would slow down the rate of government growth.
Unfortunately, David Cameron himself is fairly hopeless. He is
lightweight, ineffective, desperate for power and, quite frankly, a Tony
And the real conservatives within the conservative party are sitting on
But, please do not despair, because the people are waking up to the
nefarious activities of their governments.
Indeed, I have spent much of this afternoon reading through a whole
bunch of blogs and comments from UK lefties
who are appalled at the way in which Brown's government has been behaving
over many issues.
This heartens me a lot. And this is exactly what we need to see
happening; both rightists and leftists waking up to the fact that our
governments and many of their workers are thoroughly corrupt and
And what we also want them to understand is that big, intrusive
governments, of all persuasions, are highly detrimental to the people - in
much the same way that huge corporations can be detrimental.
In addition, I would point out that I still believe very strongly that
The Three Great Freedoms
are the route to success in the long term; i.e. the ability for everyone
to receive and transmit information at all times.
But what has been happening recently is that our governments have
sought to access more information about us while trying to deny us the
ability to seek similarly detailed information about them.
For example, I believe that if government workers such as police
officers can access personal details about us - without extremely
compelling reasons to do so - then we should be able to access
personal details about those police officers.
Yep, I know it sounds crazy, but, in the long term, my belief is that
this is the way in which we must go in order to curtail the ability of
powerful government workers to do us wrong.
Indeed, I think that there is a strong argument for the view that the
more powerful are various individuals then the more should detailed
information about them be made available to the public.
At the moment, it is the other way round!
And I am quite pleased to point out that I recently discovered that
George Orwell had arrived at a similar point of view.
Great minds clearly think alike!
As another example, in the long term, I want to see CCTV cameras in
every hospital ward and in every classroom so that those with power over
our vulnerable loved ones can be monitored. The same goes for every court
Once again, I know that this sounds crazy, but I think that this is the
only way to go; particularly given the truly appalling catalogue of
failures that have occurred in the UK in all the above domains wherein
government workers operate. For example, we have actually had hundreds of
die of starvation in our hospital wards - so callous and
uncaring are so many hospital staff.
Basically, we cannot trust our governments and we cannot trust
government workers. We cannot trust them at any level.
And the only way in which we can protect ourselves from them is to
ensure that we can monitor them closely while at the same time reducing
their power over us.
This means that we need to be able to watch
them very closely indeed.
Ho Hum. Never mind. Bar some major catastrophe, we are definitely going
to win this war.
More advice needed from the master! ...
I took your advice contained in your response to an email which had the
heading; "For how much longer must we continue to endure? ..."
It worked beautifully.
In my office we often have discussions about women and feminism. I
always do my best to promote the anti-feminist cause. However, I do not
usually get much sympathy even from the men.
So for the past two weeks I tried the tactic that you suggested, by
pointing out the various ways in which government workers benefited
themselves by supporting feminism.
The result is that their attitudes have changed appreciably.
Just as you said, the penny began to drop.
Now I want to seek more advice from the master.
What is the best strategy to persuade women?
A true fan.
Dear True Fan
Your master does indeed have some advice concerning your most astute of
And here it is.
When it comes to persuading the women, don't bother.
You might as well try to convince lottery jackpot winners that doing
the lottery is a waste of time.
Now, I say this, not because I believe that women do actually benefit
from feminism, but because, for the most part, they
believe that they do. And the arguments that demonstrate
otherwise are, mostly, a bit too complicated to get across to them
Furthermore, they believe that many of the goodies that they currently
enjoy are available now because of feminism when, in fact, this is mostly
The goodies that we all enjoy these days have arisen not from
feminism, but from science, technology, medicine and, also, from the
social/political activities of various other groups such as trades unions,
gays (yes, gays), racial activists, libertarians, civil liberties groups
But I can see nothing worthwhile that feminism has ever done.
Both men and women would now be leading far happier lives if feminism
had never existed.
As far as I am concerned, feminists are, by and large, rather nasty
empty-headed women who are forever seeking to stir up hatred towards men.
Nevertheless, in order to return to your question, Yes, there is a
strategy that undermines women most effectively when they try to support
feminist principles and policies.
It undermines the men too.
And devastatingly so!
I have talked about this strategy many times before but, in a nutshell,
it is the one wherein you point out to them that they are hypocritical
scumbags of the highest order if they support notions that disadvantage or
discriminate against men.
"Aha. I see. So you would be quite happy to see your son, your brother,
your father or, indeed, yourself, being denied a job, being falsely
imprisoned, educationally disadvantaged, demonised, ejected from the home,
denied access to the children etc etc etc
"You would be quite happy with such things happening to you or to your
loved ones, would you? You would not complain about such things.
"What? You say, No? You say that you would
be concerned if such terrible things happened to you or to your loved
"Then you are a f###cking hypocrite, aren't you?
"So long as you are not affected by such policies, you
couldn't give a damn. But if
you or your loved ones were affected by such things, then you
would be wailing like a baby.
"I think, therefore, that we can safely discount all the nonsense that
you have been espousing earlier, and conclude quite firmly that you
do believe that treating men in such a fashion is wrong.
"Quite clearly, therefore, you have shown yourself to be a hypocrite -
pure and simple - and a SCUMBAG!"
Wins every time!
And then, of course, should they looked shocked, pained or outraged at
your suggestion that they are hypocrites and scumbags, you look at them
"Oh Dear, you think that I am treating you unjustly, eh?
"Well, you, yourself, can hardly complain about this without even
further proving my point!
"You clearly are a hypocrite! - through and through."
On gold-digging Filipino women ...
Greetings Angry Harry,
My name's K and I am from the
I'll go straight to the point.
In my country,
there's this trend of our own local women starting to prefer foreign guys
instead of our own men. You see, our country is a very poor country thats
why you really can't blame some women here who go gold-digging by tempting
foreigners who visit our country.
What makes me mad though is that
they keep on denying this fact that most of them are just lazy gold
diggers wanting the easy way out from poverty. Here's their excuse, they
say its because most Filipino men cannot provide enough these days for
their own families (which obviously is not true).
Its an obvious
scapegoat for their gold-digging behavior.
They still have the
audacity to blame us Filipino men.
I'm having this online debate
right now with a couple of women and i'm running out of bullets.
Can you help me on this? what can you say about this?
>!'m having this online debate right now with
a couple of women and i'm running out of bullets
As one MRA to
another - stop wasting your time arguing with the women!
time talking to the men!
Three men imprisoned for rape, on the say-so of just one woman ...
Love your site and I am female.
am ashamed of members of my own sex to be honest. What I have been reading
about this case is absolutely appaling.
The Alleged victim
admitted to lying 56 times
The alleged victim never appeared for
the start of the trial and had to be brought to court by the Police.
Only after being dragged out of a house 5 Days after saying she was
raped in a stairwell did she change her story and claim she was raped in a
I remember the
case. The three men served over 6 years in jail before being released;
even though even the accuser's friends said that she had been lying - in
order to get some compensation money.
Men responsible for banking crisis ...
just a little mail regarding a Sky News report on the banking crisis by a
woman who believes it was simply caused by men being men.
woman mentioned i am unable to name, but i would guess she is into
feminist and social studies, and is incapable of using plain logic.
Over all she was calling for women to take over the banking system and
despite not being a reporter was given a generous time slot on Sky News to
make her ridiculous and scientifically unfounded case against men.
The report was combined with an interview from an Icelandic government
minister (also a woman) making the same case that men are irresponsible
with money and had the banks consulted women before making risky choices
the credit problems we now face would have been avoided.
offensive was this woman on Sky News and her complete disrespect of men
leaving me speechless as to how women are allowed on national television
to speak of men like animals. Her claims were somewhat typical of a woman,
suggesting that men "stick together" and "ignore women" as well as take
"risks with money that they wouldn't do if supervised by a woman".
Her suggestions that men are to blame for financial crisis is just so
ridiculous that i wouldn't know where to begin. ... Its very much my
opinion that had women been in charge of our banks and treasury to begin
with, the credit crisis would have been much worse, and possibly more
difficult to get out of. This worries me, because as you know, women dont
use their heads and dont think logically.
... The fact is men are
much more responsible with money in society, and this has been backed up
by numerous studies. Women tend to spend more money that men, especially
on themselves. Men are raised to be carefull with money as it is them who
are primarily responsible for looking after the family and providing for
womens needs. The banking crisis, is just something which occurs in the
global market every so often. I strongly believe this is an issue we must
keep an eye on.
Grandma approves of AH ...
I'm a mother and grandmother from TX. I love visiting your site because
my own son and grandson have been victimized by a very anti-male system.
My son has fought for over 5 years to at least have his visitation orders
upheld, and be allowed to even know where his son is at.
His ex has been convicted of drug possession and drug delivery charges-
has abandoned, abused and neglected my grandson- and the system has
ignored all the motions and pleas brought before them for help with the
We've contacted every local, state and national representative about
the bias and corruption here, to no avail. It's just about driven us
insane, but we continue to try to make changes where we can, hoping that
some day children will no longer suffer so needlessly, as my precious
What are we supposed to do ...
I have been reading your site since last summer and have probably read
nearly all of it.
It seems to me that you have a very good grip on the problems but you
dont seem to come up with solutions.
What are we supposed to do? What can ordinary men do to stem the tide.
Could you please write something that deals with this?
Well, I cannot possibly suggest what individuals, themselves, can do
unless I know about who they are, their line of work, their skills, their
talents, and so on.
But, throughout this site, I have, in fact, given many pointers; e.g.
as can be found on my page entitled
In a nutshell; do your best to undermine the opposition in any way that
You can join the war on any battlefront that you care to choose.
And if you haven't got the time to do much then you can always donate
to your favourite men's website - preferably this one!
The sooner that the war is won, the sooner will your life change for
the better - and, markedly so, would be my guess.
There is now so much men's activism going on via the internet that you
will surely be able to find some niche wherein you can contribute in some
Beyond this, of course, there is also the real world.
Undermine those who disadvantage men whenever and wherever you can.
If there are people in your workplace who promote misandry, undermine
If you are talking politics with someone, undermine all those
politicians and parties who fail to support men - i.e. just about all
politicians and parties.
If you are talking to women who support what is going on, tell them
that they are disgusting traitors to their very own loved ones;
particularly if they have boys. In other words, undermine them.
If you are talking about the media - newspapers, TV etc - then badmouth
and denigrate all those involved in disseminating misandry.
The same goes for businesses and their products.
Advertise and support men's activism. Push it into the consciousness of
as many people as possible - particularly the men.
Turn yourself into a weapon!
I note from your email address that you probably work for a government
department. If this is the case, then people like you should be
particularly worried about the way things are heading; because your
government will monitor you very closely indeed - as I am sure you are
already aware. And this will continue to get worse.
It is no coincidence that government workers such as teachers, police
officers, social workers, civil servants etc etc are the most closely
monitored workers of all.
After all, the closer that you are to those who govern, the closer must
you be controlled and scrutinised!
The pay is good compared to everyone else at the moment, but this won't
be the case for long. Besides which, what a price, eh?
Furthermore, as the divide between those who work for government and
those who do not grows wider and wider, the hostility towards government
employees is bound to grow. Indeed, I strongly suspect that this is
actually one of the aims of those in the governing elite. (Remember: the
more disharmony, the better it is for them.)
In other words, never let go of the fact that we are all in this
The wholesale disadvantaging of men throughout the legal
system, the health system, the educational system etc etc etc applies to
men; left and right, good and bad, black and white, day and night.
so there are not really many men out there who would not benefit quite
significantly from getting this war over - fought and won.
(Sure, there are many men whose government jobs currently
thrive on all the misandry but even they - as 'men' - are definitely
losing far more than they are gaining. There are a zillion jobs that we
need government workers to do, but debilitating men - all men - is not one
So, if you do work for government, then please do all that you
can do to undermine anybody or any policy that endorses the current
Goodness me. We have now even got Harriet Harman getting away
with a policy wherein even if it is proved
that a woman prostitute has successfully deceived a man
with regard to her true situation then it is he who will get
If you are a man then these people are gradually taking
everything away from you; your money, your liberty, your privacy,
your security, your family, your time, your dignity, your country, your
And this will never stop unless we stand
up to them.
And if we do not stand up to them, then there will come a
point where we no longer have the capability to stop them. The whole
system will become unassailable.
And when this situation is reached,
they will be able to kill you or toss you into prison without batting an
Let us never kid ourselves and believe that the days when
powerful groups can get away with gross injustice and murder are over,
because they are not.
It only seems this way because of our current
But these are changing.
In summary - undermine the opposition wherever and whenever you can.
And use whatever talents, skills and opportunities that you have in order
to do this.
And please do not feel any guilt about doing so. These
people are out to wreck your life in order to profit themselves.
Let's get this show truly on the road and show those scumbags that they
can no longer get away with all this.
In other words: Don't just talk
about it all. Don't just moan about it. Don't just tell people about it.
AH is too offensive ...
I've been reading all your posts regarding feminism for a couple of months
now. I agree with most of what you have to say-- some more or less than
others-- but there is only one comment I want to touch on.
One of your most frequent comment is "If they're offended, GOOD!"
That, by far, is one of the most... stangest, un-relative comment you've
ever made on any of your posts. I understand that you're doing this as,
let's say, 'a taste of their own medicine' to the feminists who find it
funny to hurt/diminish a man's character... but I find that highly...
immature and unreasonable. Clearly, you see these acts as unnessacarily
cruel, unjust, and just plain stupid-- then, why exactly are you doing the
By doing so, it shows us all that you... don't really care what feminists
do, but you care as long as it's done to men. If you find putting men into
such a horrid light, well, HORRID, and you don't agree with doing that to
anyone-- why would you do it yourself?
I am specifically talking about your "Dealing
with an Unhappy Woman" post. Or, as I like to call it, "Dealing with
an Unhappy PERSON" post. You can rest assured that I would not approve of
writing something like this about anyone-- men, women, children, etc.
Anyways, touching back: You've said before on some of your other posts
about schooling: "Feminists blame school's teaching if girls are doing
worse than boys. Feminists blame boys if boys are doing worse than girls."
Therefore, one can claim that feminists change their moral values
depending on female-vs-male.
You've said before on some of your other posts: "Feminists are cruel
because they enjoy posting stuff that involve hurting men (i.e: you've
said before, cutting off their penises)." Alternatively, you also say: "Me
suggesting shooting females, however, is a-okay! (which, of course, I
understand as a joke... but it still projects an image that you only care
about your moral values as long as they benefit men.)"
Anyways, it makes you look a lot like... you guessed it-- a feminist! It's
almost like someone trying to teach someone else not to do the wrong thing
by committing the 'wrong thing' against them. Effective? Meh, maybe, or
maybe not. ...The best way to do things? right? mature? I would like to
say not-- if you've noticed, legal systems don't steal back from theives,
rape rapists, or put drinkers into car-crashes, nor do teachers bully
bullies in order to teach them the right thing.
The mature thing to do is to set up a good example. Setting up your
post... esentially does nothing. Stupid feminists are only going to send
hate-mail to you, and they'll most-likely get revenge on your revenge-post
by putting up more revenge posts (see how stupid vengence is?). Stupid
women-haters are not going to take the joke and feel more confident that
it is okay to laugh at serious acts of violence against women, as you put
it. The only people who'll learn from this, AH, are going to be the ones
who ALREADY know it's stupid altogether.
I know you're probably going to think: "Well, FEMINISTS do this-- why
Because, Harry, I thought that you were better than this. After preaching
so long about how these things were wrong, I think a lot of us thought
that you were better than this.
You've got a lot to say. Don't ruin it by turning into a feminist.
1. My "Dealing with an
post is too stupid and over-the-top to be particularly offensive; and it
is clearly not meant to be taken seriously; but maybe there is a cultural
thing going on here, because humour will differ in different parts of the
Nevertheless, if some western women do find the aforementioned piece to
be particularly offensive then I reckon that they will learn a thing or
(When I wrote that particular piece, however, it never crossed my mind
that it would be seen by some as offensive. It was only because I received
a couple of emails about it that I realised that it might be offensive to
I must also add that if the piece was, indeed, likely to be highly
offensive to women then my missus would have given me an earful over it.
2. I have dealt with the issue of offensiveness many times on this
website (and elsewhere with MRAs) and, further, I really have thought a
great deal about it. But there are soooooo many reasons why I inject
hostility and, in my view, a relatively mild degree of offensiveness into
this site that it would take me far too long to explain them.
3. "After preaching so long about how these things were wrong, I
think a lot of us thought that you were better than this."
I did not start this fight. I, and others like me, are reacting
to what has been going on for decades.
You are surely not going to tell me that men who are finally firing
back the same kind of bullets that they have had to face for three decades
are somehow equivalent to those who started it all - and who kept on - and
keep on - firing and firing?
Furthermore, I don't actually imprison innocent people. I don't kick
them out of their homes. I don't make or promote laws and policies that
are wholesale stacked against one group of people etc etc etc etc.
I don't damage people's lives
I don't promote policies that would do so.
I am not an academic or a journalist who purposely fudges the evidence
in order to stir up hatred towards others.
I am not a social worker who supports a regime that is designed to
break up families.
I am not a police officer who arrests men and keeps them in prison for
months on end solely on the basis of an accusation.
Etc Etc Etc.
And I am not part of any organisation that is actually engaged in doing
But, more important by far when it comes to hostility or
offensiveness on this particular website is the fact that unless the
"powers-that-be" feel in some way threatened by the growth of the MM, they
will do absolutely nothing to help men and they will continue to
disadvantage them; e.g. see my page about
As such, the offensiveness, the hostility - whatever - coming from a
site like this acts as a wake-up call to those powers-that-be.
And this is part of the intention.
(And, of course, when it comes to the "powers-that-be" one can include
the group called 'western women' - the most pampered and privileged group
on the planet - hence the 'humour' directed at them.)
But, of course, if this site had 1 million visitors every day then I
would have to tone it all down.
After all, it is one thing to moan to your friends about women and
suggest, for example, that they should all get back to the kitchen, but it
is quite another thing to articulate the same notion to millions of
Similarly, I doubt very much that I would be calling judges 'scumbags'
if I had a weekly audience of millions.
I'd be locked up!
Finally, I must point out that I am reasonably quite aware of how
effective - or not - my various forms of activism tend to be -
particularly with regard to specific targets - and I can assure you that
demonstrating a willingness to be offensive and/or hostile towards them is
much more effective than not doing so.
That's the way that it works out there.
And so I think that I can best address your main points as follows.
The primary reason that I am sitting here is to change things - not to
demonstrate that I am better than anyone else.
Bring on the Chinese! ...
Firstly, great site. I stayed up half the night reading when I first
discovered you and it made me alternately laugh and intensely angry. I
must agree with you that Harriet Harman is nauseating, hypocritical and
generaly unfit to live.
And I'm Chinese and living in Singapore!
But railing against her won't get us anyway. She, like all her ilk
before her needs something hardcore to unseat her. Is there anything I can
do/assist to further this end?
Yep; you can start by educating Chinese men about the horrors that they
will face if their politicians wake up to the amount of money and power
that they can derive for themselves by promoting feminism.
You need to expose feminism for what it really is before it gets a
For how much longer must we continue to endure? ...
A couple of years ago or so I e-mailed you to ask when you thought that
your assertion that the men's movement will succeed would actually happen.
Although you obviously couldn't give exact dates you guessed that by about
2010 it might start to really take off. We are now only a year away from
then and I just wondered if you still stand by that?
I myself sometimes see encouraging signs with recognition on father
custody and male victims of domestic violence but they seem to be small
and not that often. I worry too that there is still a huge level of
misandry out there and men are basically just too chilvilrous to fight
back and stick up for their rights.
Actually, I think that I was even more optimistic than you suggest!
I predicted that by the year 2010 the MM would be in full swing.
I was wrong.
It is all taking much longer than I imagined; basically because the
forces that profit from the disadvantaging and demonising of men are just
so goddamn enormous. Nevertheless, I do take quite a bit of pride in
watching just about all of my other 'predictions' coming true - albeit
much more slowly than I envisaged.
Furthermore, it remains quite clear to me that the MM is growing and
that, eventually, it will exert the most monumental force.
With regard to chivalry being the main obstacle to the growth of the
MM, I have to disagree. Chivalry is, indeed, a problem, but, in my view,
it is a fairly minor problem in comparison to some others.
What you are seeing going on out there is not mainly the result of
chivalry. It is the result of huge psychological forces persistently
being imposed upon the people by those millions of people
who seek to profit from those forces - with one of these forces being, "If
you dare to speak out, you will lose your job" ... or some malicious woman
from your distant past will be encouraged to conjure up some false
accusation of abuse against you in order to get a buck or two and/or to
exert some kind of revenge on behalf of the sisterhood should you speak
out against it.
Indeed, men often dare not protest about all the injustice lest they
unwittingly raise the heckles of just one of the many thousands
of deeply malicious women who exist in our midst - women who are actually
encouraged, aided and abetted when it comes to making pernicious and bogus
accusations against men by our very own government.
In other words, men are being intimidated into silence through a number
of very powerful mechanisms.
And so, on the one hand, you have these massive forces beating down on
men coupled with the fact that men still dare not resist them.
And so, of course, progress remains incredibly slow.
But I, myself, do not think there is anything particularly wrong with
chivalry - at least in the sense that I understand the word.
If chivalry means protecting the weak, being honest, being sincere,
being courteous and not forever thinking only about oneself, then I am all
for it. And I would hate to see it disappear.
And I would also suggest that being chivalrous should apply toward
both men and women - as it used to do.
But our forces are definitely a-gathering - at least here in the UK,
and in my area of cyberspace. Of this I am certain. And I also see much
ground being gained in America and Australia.
And more and more men are definitely beginning to see how they are
purposely being duped and disadvantaged.
The current economic crisis is also helping men to wake up to the
arrogance and the self-serving corruption of those in power.
And what you will see during the forthcoming months is a dramatic
increase in the number of people who are prepared to rail against their
Indeed, there is an increasing number of inter-connections taking place
between those whose main concern is the burgeoning power and corruption of
government and those whose primary aim is to further the MM. (And, as I
mentioned somewhere else, black and white males are increasingly beginning
to unite in their efforts to destroy feminism.)
The upshot is that our own forces are getting much, much stronger.
And, while on the subject of government, I think that it is
particularly important for me to point out that demonstrating to the
public just how it is that governments (and others) actually profit from
'disharmony' (and, hence, by demonising men, by promoting fatherlessness
etc etc) is one of the most effective ways to wake up people to what is
Of all the arguments that I have ever used in the course of my
activism, nothing carries as much weight as pointing out to men
how it is that various groups - such as governments, government workers,
feminists, the abuse industry etc - actually profit from all
the hatred towards men that they encourage.
And so, for example, simply claiming that men are being unfairly
treated does not seem to have much impact on the average man. Bemoaning
the fact that the justice system is biased against men does not seem to
arouse much in the way of sympathy. And so on.
But demonstrating to men exactly how it is that a bunch
of scumbags are actually profiting themselves by
disadvantaging them not only seems to anger them, but it also seems to
turn on a light in their brains; i.e. they begin see why
certain things are happening.
For example, when I tell the uninitiated that the official 'rape'
figures are baloney, they often exhibit incredulity. "Why on Earth would
the police lie about the rape figures?" But when I point out that the lies
are designed to buttress various empires, jobs and pensions, the penny
begins to drop - and a small light comes on.
And so my current advice to all serious MRAs is that they should
be seeking to demonstrate to other men how it is that
certain groups of people profit from all the misandry that
But, getting back to your question: How long is it all
going to take? Well, my best guess at the moment is that it will be
somewhere during the next 3-5 years that the MM finally gets some serious
Well, let's hope so!
Time for white men to wake up ...
Kudos for your continued work on the MM front.
I just wanted you to know that you've inspired me to start the White
Male Support Group here in Rochester New York, USA. I'm starting to get a
bit of interest, and it's awesome to meet with guys who are thinking like
The MM is definitely alive and well and living in each one of us. As
time passes, here in the US, with the new Obama administration, we are in
for a long 4 years.
These liberals are out of control...surprise, eh? Here are two short
videos for you to watch.
What I've found to be exceptionally profound is that men don't seem to
research the MM issues until they themselves are discriminated against.
The downfall of the liberals will be their absolute power blinding them to
how radical their left wing anti-male agenda is. It is only a matter of
time before the men's movement gains strength and momentum that is strong
enough to gain the attention it should have.
I very eagerly await the day when we truly fight back and are again a
force to be reckoned with. Right now I see the folly of men, at least in
this country, to be what a guy named Chris Argyris calls "skilled
incompetence", or, roughly, the tendency to placate others so as not to
discomfort oneself. The proverbial "yes dear" to the wife.
I've spoken with a lot of men over the years....many of whom had been
divorced and raked over the coals in the divorce "settlement". Many of
them have given up. With my support group, I hope to change all that in at
least some men. I am going to make a difference. I live it, breath it, and
have tremendous passion for it.
What excites me most about this is that I realize the tools, skills,
and depth men have versus women. There really are some women of substance,
but most are conniving, self-serving, narcissistic selfish dirtballs who
deserve what they will get in time...that is, lack of respect from men and
their male kids, less in the way of social programs, and hopefully the
elimination of affirmative action.
As they seem to think they are gaining, women actually are ruining
their own lives, and those of their female children. Men are waking up
thanks to people like you. I've studied you, your ideas and plans for
years now. Thanks for the seed that you planted. It is now my turn to pass
that on. And the more that passing happens, it will become an exponential
growth. I have to admit, I like being the underdog, cuz the top dog always
becomes complacent. Keep up the great work. I'm loving all this.
I must say that I do, now, approve very much of a white male support
group, though I would much rather that men of all colours would much more
quickly join together in the battles ahead.
I am sure that the latter will arise, particularly since I have
recently seen quite an upsurge in black men railing against feminism on
the internet and, indeed, often clearly reaching out to white males to
support them - which they are definitely doing.
But I suspect that, at the moment, waking up sleeping white men via
their consciousness of their own colour will be a good way of attracting
more men to the cause.
Pity! - but that's the way that it seems to be - at least for the
You are absolutely right about the future 'demise' of women. I still
cannot quite understand how the 'professional' feminists - even the
apparently brighter ones - cannot seem to see the writing on the wall if
they continue with what they are doing. And the same goes for the
Have they not read their history books?
Do they not have the brains to realise that they are driving themselves
- and women - to the point wherein the most enormous backlash against them
is going to take place?
... assuming, of course, that we all manage to avoid the horrendous
damage that deranged and/or unhappy men will shortly be able to inflict
upon huge numbers of people - e.g. via a virus, perhaps?
It is sheer madness to antagonise so many millions of men.
I suspect that one of the main reasons for their blindness and
their stupidity is that they are not thinking very deeply at all -
probably being too pre-occupied with making sure that they are licking the
appropriate backsides in order to progress up some government career
ladder to have any time left to think about what they are actually doing.
But some of them know damn well what they are doing.
They are profiting themselves.
Men should be locked up until proved innocent ...
You are freakin hilarious.
Re. Feeding the abuse industry
Child abuse happens. It is very serious and damages children. It is
very hard for a child to speak out. It is extremely hard to PROVE child
abuse. These false accusations are very damaging for a mans reputation.
BUT if you have ever loved a child, or been a child, I say take it like a
The people who are falsely accused can deal with it and have their name
cleared. Each child must be believed.
You lot (men) should voluntarily lock yourselves up until each women
and child feels safe enough to report any spousal abuse or child abuse.
Anyone reported should have to stay locked up until proven innocent.
It is the only way to stop the cycle. If you gave a sh*t about CHILDREN,
your children, your grandchildren, you would all do it.
AH: Don't kid yourself that the above specimen is particularly
rare. There are thousands of obnoxious women like this living within our
midst. And many of them are to be found working in the abuse industry.
These wicked individuals have a deep-seated hatred of men and, over the
years, their malicious influence has held great sway in western
Anyway. Here is my reply.
You are clearly very concerned about women and children being abused.
But I think that my idea would protect them much better than yours. We
should lock them up, keep them indoors, and if ever they do venture
outside, we should ensure that they are covered up from head to toe.
I think that this would protect many women and children.
Indeed, if my idea would save just one child, it would surely be worth
employing, wouldn't it?
on misogyny ...
I am a woman who has three adult sons and three adorable grandsons. In 2006,
my youngest son was accused of sex crimes by his stepdaughter. We are sure he is
innocent as he insists because his wife (now ex wife) has pulled so many scams
for money, and she wanted to divorce and get all assets. (which she has now
done). My son has been sentenced to prison for 24 years. We are in Kansas. No
justice was exercised, only a rush to manufacture evidence. There was no
evidence, but he was convicted anyway.
This has been so difficult for my family to deal with, especially his own son.
My eldest son came upon your site. He reads it daily. He has now, openly became
a hater of women, maybe it was always there, latently. On most things, I agree,
but I don't think all women are mean, I don't think I am mean. It has gotten so
bad that we have now stopped speaking. He gradually diverted his feelings into
hatred of me! I have never liked the women's movement. I was just fine, the way
it was, and I can remember those days when mothers didn't have to work. Maybe,
you could say something in your site to tone down men out there who go off the
deep end, as my son has done.
Of course, I am sorry to hear that you and your son are becoming increasingly
alienated from each other, but sites like this are not the cause of this.
The hatred towards men that has been emanating from women for the past few
decades is evident for all to see. And it is this, more than anything, that is
causing a backlash against women to take place - a backlash that will surely
have significant negative consequences for western women if they do not wake up;
e.g. see Men have Bred Dogs and Cattle.
Why Not Women?
Might I suggest that you take a closer look at the hateful way in which so
many western women behave and speak these days.
As an example of the latter, I simply re-print one email from a woman -
without any alterations - which I received today.
Ha! Ha! Ha!
We women have finally earned full rights where "housekeeping" now means getting
the house in the divorce, clean up your own filthy mess you pigs. To call a man
a savage animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo, only capable
of raping and pillaging his own planet, women and ultimately himself.
Figures given the fact that you pricks are the lesser 'Y' chromosome, clearly
missing rather essential genetic components necessary for intelligent human
Do you really expect your son to live in the kind of world wherein he has
continually to put up with this kind of attitude?
Do you really expect him to remain unaffected and silent while the law and
his very own government both allow and encourage women to walk all over him; no
matter how disgusting their attitudes and their behaviours towards him might be?
And with your other son in prison for an offence that you seem sure he did
not commit, I find it all rather surprising that you are not now wholeheartedly,
openly and actively standing against what so many western women
have now become.
Maybe it is because you are not doing this that your son's attitude towards
you has deteriorated.
I suspect that he thinks that you have betrayed him.
And I do not blame him for this.
My own view is that all 'mothers' who support feminism and/or who fail to
fight against it, do, indeed, betray their own sons. And they betray them very
So badly, in fact, that it actually sickens me to see them masquerading as
Furthermore, I actually hope that those young men who were brought up without
their fathers will perhaps, one day, better understand why those fathers might
have had no option but to throw in the towel and leave - often turning in upon
themselves and resorting to drink and drugs simply in order to escape from the
hopeless situations in which they once found themselves; situations wherein they
were treated as if they were worthless by their women; women who were given
every opportunity and offered every incentive to get rid of them; something
which might well have happened to your son who now lives in prison.
His wife wanted all the assets, and your government gave her all the weapons
that she needed to get them.
And yet you are blaming my site for your son's alienation?
Canadian men and boys don't count ...
I thought I'd bring this to your attention because it serves as an example of
the bias in media regarding men.
This is an article about the tragic death of a woman. Nothing good about that
of course. What bothered me about this article though is that it claims to
pertain to the plight of the homeless.
That's all fine and dandy I suppose. What I don't understand - and maybe
you can help me out here - is that the article clearly points out that this is
really a men's' issue; yet the only face the media bothers to put on this issue
is that of a woman.
I mean, here we have an article about the homeless, and it even states
within its text that all the faces in line are those of men (save one) but when
one woman finds herself in that same line and suffers the same conditions as all
those men, it's suddenly "an issue".
Men are murdered on the street far more often than woman are. Men comprise
the vast majority of the homeless and, unlike women, they have no special
shelters to go to should things really go down the tubes. This lady had all of
this, and yet still she made some rotten choices.
I'm not blaming her for being murdered. It's really not about that at all.
It's the fact that with all those resources and, basically, special treatment,
when she winds up in the same line with the men because she's exhausted all of
her other options, SHE becomes the martyr for the homeless. WTF ?
I guess all those men who live on the street, are abused, assaulted,
murdered , drug addicted, alcoholic, and otherwise destitute don't count.
PS: Oh...it's a little late but you'd love this. About two or three years ago
these two highschool twins here in town decided that they didn't want to play on
the girls' high-school hockey team anymore. Actually, they wanted to play with
the boys' team.
When the school board said "Uh...no , you have a league already." the twin
girls took them to our own Star Chamber (the Manitoba Human Rights Commission)
Naturally, these two girls won the "right" to play on the boys' high-school
hockey team despite the fact that the boys weren't allowed to play on the girls'
team. And then they each got special coaching and four thousand dollars for
"pain and suffering" due to their ordeal in advancing the cause of "equality".
At no time did anybody ever ask the obvious. The obvious being, of course,
that if these two girls got their way, wouldn't that deprive two boys of spots
on a hockey team?
on rape in war ...
I was reading a post on MND wherein it was claimed that General George Patton
said that he would hang any soldier who raped an enemy woman. And, while I must
confess that I did not follow all the arguments too well, I do find myself being
somewhat irked by the notion that raping a woman is akin to murder - and, in
this particular case, the implication seems to be that raping one woman is
actually worse than killing men - hundreds of them.
Furthermore, while feminists like to portray women as being particularly
gentle souls when it come to "voting for war", it seems to me that one of the
main reasons why women are less likely than men to "vote for war" is because it
is not women who are likely to be the most damaged or the most killed by an
Putting it simply: From a woman's point of view, allowing an aggressing enemy
soldier into her house is not likely to lead to her own death. From a man's
point of view, it is quite likely to lead to his own death.
As such, a man is more likely to "vote for a war" in order to keep the enemy
Anyway, this is what I wrote.
My impression was that many men 'rape' enemy women in war situations because
they see them as the enemy - an enemy that has often been demonised over and
over again; with many soldiers therefore seeing such women as murderous, evil,
wicked etc etc - i.e. much as they are indoctrinated to see the enemy men.
And, of course, such women are very often part of the enemy's war machine - even
if indirectly so. As such, these women are responsible for killing your friends,
bombing your country, destroying your families etc etc
[But many soldiers cannot bring themselves to kill even these 'murderous'
women - and so they rape them instead.]
As such, the idea that soldiers who rape enemy women should be hanged, whereas
those who kill enemy men should be given medals, strikes me as being decidedly
Furthermore, let us not forget that many enemy women actually offer themselves
voluntarily to incoming soldiers in the hope of saving their own necks - [which,
of course, they later deny] - with many of them actually going off into the
sunset with the very soldiers who have been killing their compatriots once the
war is over.
Indeed, in my view, it is for reasons such as this that women tend less often to
"vote" for war than do men.
The men know that they will likely be killed if the enemy gets the upper hand -
hence they are prepared to fight - for their lives! - whereas women are more
likely to escape death even if the enemy does win. As such, women are not as
concerned about protecting themselves from an aggressing enemy as are men. Quite
simply, they have less aggression to protect themselves from!
In other words, my guess would be that if women were just as likely as men to be
slaughtered by an enemy, then they would be equally likely to vote for "war".
Finally, my guess would also be that in situations wherein broken and dead
bodies litter the place, and bloody carnage lies all around for weeks on end,
being raped would be considered by most people to be something of a lucky
And this idea that being raped is akin to having your legs blown off, your
family being slaughtered, or your life being extinguished, actually makes me
feel quite ill.
Rape does not even come close to any of these things.
Perhaps one should ask real women - rather than the dysfunctional feminists who
hog the media - the following questions.
Which would be worse for you; being raped by an enemy soldier, or having your
husband, your father, your son, or your brother killed?
Which would be worse for you; being raped by an enemy soldier, or having your
legs blown off?
Which would be worse for you; being raped by an enemy soldier, or having a
bullet shot through your head?
Well, in my view, only the most dysfunctional of women - of which there seem to
be so many these days - would see a rape as being worse.
This notion that rape is akin to murder and/or serious permanent debilitation
is tossed around the place by the usual culprits simply in order to make the
crimes of men against women sound far worse than they really are - for the usual
Indeed, I, myself, would rather be raped ten times over than see my missus
lose a foot or a hand!
And the fact that so many women, these days, would clearly not subscribe to a
similar point of view should tell all you men out there something rather
profound about them.
resigned to singlehood ...
I am the proverbial devil in the bible of politically correct feminism: a white,
Christian, heterosexual male. Oof.
For several years now, I have grown more and more disenchanted with finding a
"soul mate". I have seen too much relationship tragedy, and heard too many
horror stories from friends. And a ~50% divorce rate? Great Scott, that's
flipping a coin! Frankly, I do not want to risk MY happiness and freedom by
putting my fate in the hands of a potentially volatile person with a legal
system in her back pocket.
After reading your editorial on IMBRA, I did more research and your words truly
resonated with my impression of the Western social scene -- it's an ocean of
self-centered, self-serving women that can't understand where all the men have
gone. Politicians can stop me from marrying foreign... but they cannot make me
I've been pondering various directions for my own life for a while now, and your
site gave me the clarity of thought I needed. I have voluntarily removed myself
from the eligible bachelor pool as long as I live in America during these
oppressive times. If an absolute gem of a woman falls into my life, so be it.
Though I won't be holding my breath.
In the meantime... tick tock, ladies.
Resigned to Singlehood
I, too, have learned a great deal from the thousands of men who inhabit
cyberspace, and I can tell you that, with few exceptions, singlehood appears to
be no bad thing.
Sure, there is something missing, but the many compensations seem to outweigh
that 'something' for most of the time.
Indeed, there is an article linked to somewhere on this site written by a man
who, for some reason that I cannot remember, was castrated, and he claims that
this was one of the best things that had ever happened to him.
And I think that most men can understand why this might well be the case.
On young women and girls being indoctrinated to hate men ...
Harry, you prince among men, I have an unfortunate event to relate concerning
schools being used as hubs for pushing the feminist agenda.
Last night my sister asked me for help with her English homework, which I was
all too happy to oblige.
However once i started it was difficult to conceal my horror at what she had
been tasked with.
Basically, it was a naked attempt to turn English into History in order to
push the feminist agenda. She had been given three short stories, each of which
was supposed to show how oppressed women were in the 1930s and told to
''describe what these stories tell us about the status, power and relationships
of men and women in the 1930s''.
Well that's easy NOTHING. They are stories, not historical sources, so they
tell us nothing about the position of women in the 1930s.
That question would not look at all out of place in a History exam, though of
course you'd have to replace the fictional bullsh*t for credible sources. They
can't teach this sh*t as History because its boll*cks and never happened, so it
gets slipped in as English.
It got even worse when I saw the notes she had been given in class.
I wouldn't have been surprised to find any of it in the Vagina Monologues or
any other piece of feminist garbage, and the teacher is MALE.
I tried to guide my sister towards some more neutral points but it wasn't
easy. Its scary to find this sort of thing in a prestigious grammar school like
the one my sister attends.
Just thought I'd brighten your day with some excellent news from the front.
And many girls' schools in the UK even have regular lectures given to them by
feminist outsiders who will tell the girls how awful men have behaved towards
women over the past many thousand years - and that it is now time for women to
get even with them.
These lectures would be considered as orchestrated hate speech if any other
groups were being targeted.
It is absolutely outrageous.
Indeed, it was only a few days ago that I was talking to a couple of girls
who attend the highly-respected, world-renowned, St Paul's Girls School here in
London (where Harriet Harman once attended as a pupil) and they were very
forthcoming about how anti-male were so many of their daily lessons and their
'lectures' from invited speakers.
The only thing that cheered me up about what I heard was that these two girls
had clearly recognised that they were being indoctrinated by the school to feel
antagonistic towards men.
And one of them was only thirteen!
With regard to the feminist teacher being male in your sister's case, this
does not surprise me at all.
He is probably trying to climb high in his career and so he will do his best
to ingratiate himself to those higher up the ladder.
Besides which, teachers are not the brightest of individuals - particularly
these days, I'm sorry to say. And, for the most part, they just read the
textbooks that have been allocated to them by the various examining boards -
and, needless to say, these textbooks will have been politically-corrected
through and through.
(Nevertheless, I simply do not see how teachers of history or the classics
etc etc can possibly remain ignorant of the fact that men have always been on
the receiving end of the worst treatment, unless, of course, they are not very
There is a well-known saying by George Bernard Shaw that goes something like
this; "“He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches.”
But when it comes to the soft, wooly, airy-fairy subjects (which even much of
History has now become) I think that GBS was probably correct with regard to the
teachers of today.
And my impression is that we nowadays have very third-rate teachers indeed -
even in colleges and universities. And, essentially, they will just regurgitate
the wholly biased politically-correct nonsense that they have been told to
parrot by their masters and mistresses.
If they do anything else, then their careers are likely to suffer.
And this is not an exaggeration.
I know quite a few teachers - older ones; who qualified decades ago, and they
make no bones about it.
Either they conform to politically-correct notions, or their careers are
In other words, our children are being taught to believe in what
politically-corrected leftists want them to believe - the idea being to break
apart the relationships between men and women so that left-wing governments can
grow, and become more powerful, as a result of the ensuing disharmony that is
caused by doing this.
Though, of course, most teachers remain blissfully unaware of this agenda.
Thank you for your email.
another woman praises this most fabulous website ...
You are an inspiration and a role model, and despite its vibrant hues your
website is a sight for sore eyes.
I am a design student at RIT and your articles inspire me to do something -
anything - about the horrible injustices against the men in our world. Good
work; and for the love of whom ever you deem holy, keep going, there's a lot of
us "listening". =)
-KW. (A woman!)
on women undermining women ...
I like your site, I enjoy reading your passionate views on one of the asinine
aspects of the human race. I agree with you on a lot of topics, like how
"feminists" exaggerate and victimize men, instead of simply trying to make a
level playing field. I have to tell you, I've been a victim of men (I get to
generalize if you do) all of my life, from the age of 8 until now, but the only
people that really supported me were also men, except for one sole female
The real tragedy for women I think is that other women do not support them,
even the ones that tout "feminism". They compete, snipe, undermine, it's a
primal bullsh*t thing because they all want the attention of men, they DON'T
actually want equality, they are too stupid to see that in undermining each
other they are undermining themselves.
And so people like me who don't get why the genders are competing in the
first place get blindsided (Oh yeah I'm also small and blond, women treat me
like I'm a dipsh*t whore and men either treat me with flirtatiousness or with
utter arrogance, again the dipsh*t whore thing).
Why aren't there clubs for women like the Masons or the Knights of Columbus,
the Elks, why aren't there pro baseball teams that are all female and the
players are multimillionaires?
Why do WOMEN LET MEN RUN EVERYTHING?
BECAUSE THEY WANT THEM TO.
All most women care about, as I said, is the approval and attention from men.
If there is a female anywhere near that might be prettier, smarter, more
attractive in any way, they will DESTROY her, in any subtle or overt means
So to sum up, I think women are the biggest enemy of women.
By the way Harry I'm a carpenter by trade, and the people that treat me with
the most disdain because I'm a tiny blond woman in a "man's trade" are the
Frankly I'm thinking of just making custom furniture at home because I'm so
sick of these nonstop gender issues that people throw in my face all day. But
that's another email :)
Thank you so much for making people THINK, Harry!!!!
feminine appreciation ... from a lessie!
Being a thinking woman, a non-feminist lesbian, an inveterate iconoclast, who
has experience of the horrors of
Inquisition 21, I ventured onto your site, expecting a mediocre offering.
But... it's ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT, and has kept me enthralled for hours! Your
attitudes towards the 'law', political correctness, feminist dogma, etc. are
spot on. I have a few questions : where do we go from here? How do we reach the
brainwashed masses and force back the pendulum? How can I meet others of similar
views (gender irrelevant)?
Keep it up; sanity needs people like you!
PS - I have so many radical views that I'm almost afraid to speak for fear of
offending the PC-police-state juggernaut, and being ostracised or worse. Most of
us are blindly walking along the primrose path that, during WWII, let to the gas
chambers. I could rant on and on... but I'll stop...for now...
Thank you for your email.
How do we reach the brainwashed masses and force back the pendulum?
Keep reading my stuff! - and spread the word as best as you can.
But, in a nutshell, my own view is that one must fire with fire; and so we
have to keep attacking and demonising those people who have been doing such
things to us over the past many years.
There are more of us than there are them.
I have so many radical views that I'm almost afraid to speak for fear of
offending the PC-police-state juggernaut, and being ostracised or worse.
Obviously, one does not want to lose one's job - or anything drastic like
that - but when it comes to friends and family etc, my own view is that one
should always be up front and speak one's true mind.
Honesty and openness I value almost above everything else.
Indeed, I have given my anti-pc views on numerous occasions to people all
over the place (try stopping me!) and I do not recall ever suffering any major
Besides which, I do not mind being ostracised by people whose values I
Why on Earth would I want to have anything to do with them?
In one of his pieces which I read many years ago, David Icke - strange man
that he is - said something that really resonated very strongly with me because
I had the same experience that he described. I cannot quote him exactly, but he
said something like this.
"The minute that I stopped caring about what other people thought about my
views, I became free. It was the most liberating experience that I have ever
had, and I have never looked back since that time."
Of course, he wasn't saying that he did not care about other people, and nor
was he saying that his views were always correct. His point was that he would
express his (current) views as best as he could, and as honestly as he could,
but if people saw him as an idiot or as insane then he just didn't care. He
Well, that's how I feel. And it really is a liberating experience.
The problem with dealing with the feminists and the politically-correct, of
course, is that they do not just regard you as an idiot or insane if you
disagree with them, the problem is that they try to stir up hatred towards you
in some way - often accompanied by the threat of some kind of violence or heavy
sanction (e.g. losing your job).
But, of course, two can play at that game.
And now, thanks to the internet, it is much easier for those of us who are
opposed to the current situation to give them a taste of their own medicine -
hence the presence of this website.
Most of us are blindly walking along the primrose path that, during WWII,
let to the gas chambers.
Yes indeed - which is why we need to do our very best to disempower our very
own governments in those areas where they are overplaying their hand. And the
best way to do this, in general, is to reduce the money that governments receive
- which means encouraging people to vote only for politicians who promise to
reduce taxes, or not to vote at all.
on women getting paid more than men for the same work ...
Reading your longer piece on the gender pay gap made me remember this year's
player gender working time
Williams female 1h 51 minutes (2 sets) L 750,000
Nadal male 4h 48 minutes (5 sets) L 750,000
Isn't this something to comment on? This is the kind of gender equality so
heartily embraced by, for example, Billary Clinton and her dedicated followers.
Keep up the good work
But the notion that it is fair to pay women for playing fewer sets than men
is being slowly extended into the workplace.
And it won't be long before women will expect to get paid for three hours
work what men get paid for doing five hours work.
The move in this direction is already happening - especially through the
On immature women ...
I have been a fan of your web site for quite some time. Reading your emails
gives me solace. I agree with you that the important thing to help the MM is for
men to pay attention to the issues.
For example, a recent statistic that came out in the US stated that since
November 2007 to April 2008, 300,000 men lost their jobs, while a net 700,000
women gained jobs in our economy. This is a disturbing statistic. When you add
to this that starting a few years ago; womens' businesses grew faster than mens'
for the first time; more women are attending college than men for the first
time; and more women are attaining advanced degrees than men for the first time,
you have, on the surface, a intolerable situation.
By all accounts, this seems like quite a disparity that maybe can't be
overcome. I've had conversations with men about this kind of thing, but they
show total indifference, only because they haven't been affected by this kind of
thing yet. It is frustrating to be a male who has been discriminated against
because of affirmative action laws here in the US, as well as being on the
defensive in the workplace.
However, I can't agree with you more when you state that it will only take
men's attention before there will be a pretty serious correction in the unfair
treatment of men. As one of your emailers said, I too have lost all respect for
women, but being a bit more affected by all this, they can't earn my respect and
never will. Unfortunately for the women, all the years of the feminists trying
to prove that women are a force to be reckoned with and are equal to men
(although it is more pragmatic to see it as their wanting superiority), having
given women so much freedom, attention, and control has left them to chart new
courses for themselves, and they are doing such a wonderful job of destroying
the exact goal of the feminist agenda.
When you turn on the television, they commercials are about women and their
makeup, hair, skin, and they all act so juvenile that you can't take them
seriously. The programs that gained popularity in the US are reality programs,
like "The Real Housewives of Orange County" and "Sex and the City". These
programs are waking men up, and I'm loving it. It is now chic for women to show
their bellies by wearing short shirts, act like children (there is NOTHING worse
than a 60 year old woman trying to act like her daughter), and to show no or
little responsibility in their lives. One in 4 teenage girls has an STD.
Millions of abortions are performed every year.
All you have to do is go to web sites and watch how relentlessly childish,
selfish, and uncompromising women are now. Women have always accused men of
thinking with their penises. It now appears that a woman's WHOLE existence is
her vagina. It thinks for them, it affects their moods, it is all encompassing.
Their weight, breast sizes....it is ALL about their vaginas.
Gotta admit I love to hear stories about women who wake up late in life
realizing what asses they are and have been. The most sensible people I meet are
all men. It used to be that we viewed women as being sensible, calm cool and
collected. But it's hard to look at women and feel anything like that. They have
brought about the first phase of the own demise.
I agree with you, and have felt this long before I found you and your
website, that it was only a matter of time before men would wake up and become
aggressive, tough, competitive people they are. The ultraliberalism that the
world is enjoying is a facade, and time will show this to be true. I have told
my wife about my thoughts. She initially thought I was a nut, but funny thing
has happened...when we watch tv, it is she who now despises women for what they
have become and are portraying themselves to be, which is loose, pathetic, and
not capable of being trusted.
My own wife. It doesn't get any better than that.
So, while I agree that the MM has to pay attention, it will be the women also
who will see what has happened and they too will participate in the coming of
man again. Keep up the remarkable work. I so enjoy stopping in to read you. You
are a tremendous source of pragmatism for a lot of men.
Thanks. I love being male (couldn't imagine not) and am looking forward to
when we will not have to suffer the BS we do now.
angryharry hits CounterStrike ...
just love your site. I have been a fan for a couple of years now.
You often seem to talk about spreading the word and all. Well check this out.
I am a frequent player of a game called Counter Strike.
You might have heard of it. It is the most popular game on earth.
Many braindead youngsters play that sh#t. Youngster who does not know whats
out there waiting for them.
And gues what? My nickname in the game is WWW.angryharry.com (hope it is ok
with you). Every single day I am sendig thousands of youngsters to your site. If
you play the game for like 1 hour, you can be sure that at least 100 people have
seen it. I am recruiting your young soldiers.
We are going to win this war, dont worry.
Get those 'braindead' youngsters to wake up a bit, and prepare them for World
War III; because there will be many bloody battles ahead in the near future.
And they will need to be armed.
Heads will be rolling. Guts will be spilling. And flailing limbs will be
flying around in all directions.
But, at the end of the day, there will be a huge victory for the MM.
And the 'defeated' (whom I shall not identify lest they get wind of their
forthcoming demise) shall be exiled to all the hottest deserts round the globe.
And they shall not return until they apologise for all their wickedness and all
their foul deeds, and until they promise never to whinge and whine about
whatever they are prone to whinge and whine about. And all their bank accounts
and credit cards shall be suspended forthwith so that they cannot continue to
spend all our money on stupid things and make-up. And no longer will they be
given flowers or jewellery, for there will be no special days for them!
No more birthdays. No more 'anniversaries'. And definitely no more holidays
From now on, it's going to be, "And what does my master require of me
And, "How can I service my master most magnificently before he goes out
And, "I have prepared six main courses for dinner for my master to choose
from. Perhaps my master would care to peruse the menu while I pour him some wine
and give him a massage - a massage of the most heinous kind!"
And, "If I ever fail to provide my master with the maximum of satisfaction
that is humanly possible then I shall consider myself a failure; and find him a
younger woman to assist me in my everlasting servitude."
Yep: You'd better get used to it, M - because that's where we're all heading.
I've already warned my missus that when the victory is won, then she had
better straighten herself out pretty smartish, or I'll put her up for sale on
EBay and hand her over to the highest bidder.
Minimum Starting Bid: "Free!"
Delivery Details: "Will even pay cost of transport."
Delivery Restrictions: "None - Anywhere in the Solar System will do."
And if that doesn't work, then I'll simply get rid of her by giving 50 bucks
to "a man with a van".
It'll be worth every cent!
I've got an old sack in the cellar already prepared.
Yes, Sir. When the war is finally won, every day will be a day to partay.
So, get those young men ready for action!
Thank you, M
Your activism is much appreciated.
Message to young men.
I have often see young men (particularly in the USA) talking on the internet
about how they have found themselves in trouble with their teachers or
professors simply because they have wanted to talk about - or write about - the
anti-feminist point of view.
Well, my advice is that you should never push your luck too much in such a
direction and always remember that getting good grades in education is always a
Besides which, you are sitting in front of the most powerful activist tool
So, you don't need to aggravate your teachers in order to fly into battle.
You can join the war right here.
Imagine the internet as a huge, psychological video game.
That's what I do.
And so, for example, enticing more troops into the war - perhaps a student
friend or two - by showing them what is going on would be much more effective in
furthering the cause than, let's say, writing an essay about it all.
And there really is going to be a war - with many battlefronts.
Many, many, many battlefronts.
And there are these huge forces that have to be fought.
They are so huge that they are, literally, unimaginable.
And they are all over the place.
There are thousands of empires, billions of dollars, millions of careers, and
trillions of thoughts, notions and ideas that promote the stirring up of hatred
And I am not exaggerating in the slightest.
So. We could always do with a few more troops!
But it simply is not necessary for young men to risk their grades in order to
score a few points here and there.
Ah yes. Let's face it, Boys. Some men have it. And some men don't.
AH's humour irritates woman ... who irritates AH
I came across your website recently and found while many of your arguments
are sound, I still find they often irritate me because of their anti-woman
stance. Some might call this misogyny.
On your front page today for example, you have a good piece about men being
scrubbed out of the picture when they are victims, but you interpose some silly
comments about women conecerning their competence to program computers. Why do
you feel it is necessary to do this? I would have thought your movement wanted
the support of women.
Everybody wants everybody to support their movement, but life isn't like
that. And if you rush around trying to keep everybody happy, you end up having
precious little of value to say.
It does not really concern me whether or not women support what I am saying.
Of course, I am happy to receive support from women, but I am untroubled by the
fact that they might not give this. Besides which, to put it bluntly, wherever
on the internet I see men's groups 'infiltrated' by women, I see their
effectiveness plummet like a stone.
This is not to say that all women bring about this effect
but, for the most part, they do.
For example, in the piece on my front page - to which you refer - I
point out that the BBC makes humour out of men being
castrated and having their eyes gouged out.
Any MRA should be absolutely disgusted and appalled by this.
But what are you moaning about? You are moaning about some
silly comments that I made about women.
Well, this site is designed for men. It is not designed to appeal to
And sometimes we men like to poke light fun at women.
Sorry if this "irritates" you, but there we are.
Furthermore, women - as a whole - need to be pushed off their
highly-privileged lofty pedestals for the MM to make any headway; because
while they remain sitting up there - being perceived as superior beings -
they will continue to have everybody rushing around catering for them at
the expense of everyone else.
I am often reminded of the Jews who dared not utter a word of disrespect
towards the Nazis while the Nazis themselves felt that they could say
anything - no matter how disgusting - about them.
Much of my 'humour' is designed to help counter this sort of thing.
The message is, if you like; "reasonably intelligent bloke thinks that
it is all right to poke fun at women".
But, hey, it is publicly acceptable for the BBC to make
fun out of men being castrated and having their eyes gouged out. So, be
grateful that you are not a man, eh? - or you would probably be more than
just 'irritated' at this moment in time.
Foaming with fury, would be my guess.
Putting this altogether: At the moment, it is far more
important for the MM to topple 'women' as a whole off their lofty
pedestals than it is to have the support of a few of them.
Indeed, it seems quite clear to me that western 'women' - as a whole -
nowadays make up the most selfish, greedy and uncaring group of people
that dwell amongst us.
I still find it difficult to see how they can actually endorse and
promote policies that force their own sons, fathers, husbands, brothers
etc etc to have to live in a world wherein they are continually having to
face either serious injustice or the strong possibility of it - in so many
important areas of their lives.
Yes, of course, we can certainly blame the usual culprits - our
governments, the feminists, the abuse industry etc etc - for much of this
situation, but the fact that 'women' know damn well what is going on and,
yet, they say and do nothing to counter this state of affairs, truly
Indeed, the number of women who have been caught actually colluding with each
other to fabricate allegations of 'abuse' for some kind of gain is sufficiently
high to indicate very strongly that most women are well aware of what other
women get up to. And yet women, as a whole, clearly collude with each other to
hide, as best as they can, the fact that this sort of thing goes on.
Pretty disgusting, don't you think?
And you can see them all over the place conspiring with each other and with
various disreputable groups in order to continue escalating the notion that
women are always suffering greatly no matter how privileged are their
circumstances nor how trivial are their discomforts.
And, quite frankly, the idea that women make up the 'caring' gender -
the gender also allegedly endowed with greater 'empathy' - seems to me to
be utter nonsense.
When compared to men, 'selfish', 'greedy' and 'uncaring' strike me as
being far more appropriate adjectives with which to describe them.
And so, all in all, I think that it is probably a waste of time for
MRAs to try to elicit the support of 'women'; because not only do they
seem to undermine their efforts, I doubt very much that 'women' will ever
care very much about 'men' - especially now that they think
that they don't need them.
(Given my diatribe, I must re-emphasise that I am talking about 'women'
as a whole - because there are now quite a few individual women
who are very effective MRAs.)
5. Of course, one of the reasons that the mainstream media are so
loathe to make much humour out of women's failings - relative to those of
men - is precisely because women like you are so quick to start
complaining about it - and in many cases, such women do not just complain,
they launch into full hostility over the most trivial of matters. Once
again, they seem to think that they are superior beings - so lofty in the
scheme of things that it should be forbidden for people to make any
remarks about them even in jest that might sound derogatory.
But women are not a minority group in the west like blacks and gays, you
know, and neither are they more vulnerable than men with regard to the world out
there. Indeed, western women are the least likely to be the
victims of just about anything when compared to those in other major groups.
Perhaps, therefore, they could stop whining and stop bleating so loudly about
their allegedly permanent state of victimhood.
Tell me, are you one of those many women who hisses whenever a comedian on
stage dares to make a joke at the expense of women - even though he might have
spent the previous ten minutes taking pot shots at men?
I'll bet you are.
AH gives hope ...
I'm glad I stumbled upon your web site yesterday. I read as much as I could
in 24 hours of your pages, and I'll be returning to it often to keep on
I want to thank you for opening my eyes - a 34 year old American, single,
heterosexual, white, male - to many of the social issues, and social
self-destruction, that has taken place for the majority of my life.
It seems I may have escaped the worst of what is being perpetrated now thanks
to being in the American South, where thank God, men still have some balls left,
and many women still realize the importance of their roles as mothers.
Please know that your site has given me some hope. I had not come to the
entirely correct conclusion about the true nature of feminism.... like most
brainwashed men (& women) today.
I want to offer you my sincere thanks.
Again Harry, thank you, and keep up the good work. Try to keep your head
straight & level, and your rage focused and clear, as the
Feminazicomisocialistas & their Useful Idiot pussy-boys do their best to make
you look like a misogynistic fool. Real men know better. And more and more of us
are opening our eyes to the truth.
One last tip: You may also find the American film "Fight Club" (1999) with
Brad Pitt to also be quite intriguing, as it deals with some of these very
issues, albeit in a most unusual way.
M, South Carolina - USA
Thank you kindly.
1. I started watching Fight Club some months ago, but I had to stop after
about 25 minutes because- to put it bluntly - violence that is realistically
portrayed messes up my brain; can't eat, can't sleep - and I spend the rest of
the evening being wound up and shouting at everybody.
"... as the Feminazicomisocialistas & their Useful Idiot pussy-boys do their
best to make you look like a misogynistic fool ... "
Oh Ye of Little Faith!
Surely, the very last thing that such people would want to do is to give this
site any publicity; unless, that is, they are stupid enough to undermine
themselves - in which case, of course, it should not be too difficult to deal
with them; which, in fact, has been my experience of them.
Indeed, the only people who could look at this site and think that I am a
"misogynistic fool" are usually too stupid for me to bother with. And this, in
fact, has also been my experience.
And now, I can feel a pontification coming upon me!
And here it is!
It does not matter what you say on social issues, there will always
be people who loathe and detest what you are saying.
Anyone who makes statements on social issues in a public arena
is going to attract some 'hatred' from some source or other. (Ask any mainstream
(Even Mother Theresa used to wind up large numbers of people!)
And all MRAs need to understand this if they are to rise above the hostile
criticisms that will most definitely come their way.
And, in my view, the best way to deal with this is to look closely at what
criticisms are being made - particularly if they seem to be coming from an
authoritative source - and, if they are valid, to take them on board and, if
necessary, change one's point of view. If they are not valid, then toss them
But it really is the case that it does not matter what you say,
there will always be people who will hate what you are saying.
And there is no escape from this when you project your voice into the ether.
As such, do not let the very fact that you are being criticised be an
indication that you must necessarily be wrong in what you are saying. And do not
worry too much about the fact that you receive criticism.
Indeed, if you have an 'audience' - perhaps you run a blog or a website -
then, provided that your feedback is, on balance, positive, then,
loosely speaking, you are winning! - at least, in your area of
cyberspace you are winning - and, surely, this is the only area that really
After all, your area of cyberspace is your arena!
Jeff loves AH ...
I love you.
That is all.
I love you!!!!
Government DV researcher reads AH ...
Firstly, let me say that I am a big fan of your work and a quiet supporter of
your movement. I particularly enjoyed reading your piece regarding the angry
E-Mail you got from a XXXX [censored by AH] student about the knife block,
though I must say that I was wholly embarrassed about the whole thing.
As a criminologist and XXXXXX [censored by AH] researcher on Domestic
Violence, I happened to come across your website whilst looking for literature
on Erin Pizzey, who I admire for her courage against the wave of intolerable
feminist hysterical lesbian types.
I happened upon
this article which is more bad news for John Leslie. I cannot say whether or
not he did what the original claim said he did, but the incredible uprising of
random women who claim he raped them is, frankly, astounding! This woman is now
claiming that he raped her, get this, over a decade ago!!
Unbe-freaking-lievable that he was actually ARRESTED and questioned for 3
hours about this. 3!!
About something that happened half of my lifetime ago! I can barely remember
last month, let alone that amount of time! How is it at all possible that this
case could be held up for enough time that the police could get a warrant for
his arrest? It truly boggles the mind.
Keep up the good fight,
The number of women who come forward claiming falsely to have
been abused by some poor sod who happens to have hit the headlines recently over
some abuse allegation or other is positively obscene.
In one case - from about 7 years ago according to my memory - which concerned
'abuse' in the 1970s in Ireland - some male social worker ended up being accused
by about 40 people who had never even been to the care home wherein he had
worked. They simply fabricated their allegations out of thin air and hoped that
the police would be unable to check out their details.
They were wrong.
Clearly, the smell of possible compensation money and the thirst to portray
oneself as a victim who has 'survived' is a great incentive for many people to
make false accusations of 'abuse'.
After all, what have they got to lose?
Here is what Carol Sarler
wrote in the Times about the large number of women who trump
up false allegations against some poor man who has just been accused of
something sexual and whose name has, therefore, appeared in the media ...
... out from the woodwork crawl the snipers and the vipers, each
busting guts to help the Crown Prosecution Service to bolster potentially wobbly
prosecutions. Facts don’t come into it. The nature of most of these cases
means no witnesses, no evidence, no forensics; allegations are frequently
carbon-dated – King’s went back 30 years, as did Kelly’s, and Langham’s nearly a
decade – so one word against another is all there is.
If the anonymous accuser is not believed, he or she has lost little but time
and theatrics; if he or she is, the rewards are great and, crucially, calculable
before the trial begins.
Criminal compensation is awarded according to published tariff; you can actually
look it up to see how much for oral sex, how much for intercourse, how much for
buggery — so if there is to be no supporting evidence anyway, the incentive is
clearly to go for broke.
[i.e. lie and exaggerate as much as you can] Meanwhile, agent purveyors
can tell you, in advance and to the penny, the eventual return for waiving
anonymity and flogging the sorry tale to a panting Sunday rag . . . if, that is,
you manage to be convincing enough in court. ...
The bigger pity, of course, is not just that a minx makes money. It is
that in this mutually back-scratching
collusion of interests, between alleged victim and
instruments of prosecution, it is truth that is the first casualty.
Young man wakes up ... and skips class ...
I would just like to say that you are indeed a hero. I found your site while
doing research for a female friend of mine. I was concerned about the level of
objectification of women in the media and how this is affecting them. I had been
a long time believer that sexism affected men almost as much as women ( I have
been verbally and physically abused for this "radical" view before mind you) as
I did the research I was rapidly coming into the idea that sexism against women
wasn't that bad after all. And then I found the innocent looking site of one
humble Angry Harry. I read the first page I came across "What a piece of sh*t is
man". By the end I was hooked.
I spent the next 6 hours reading materials from your site and doing research
to back it up (Just to be sure) I skipped two classes since I just couldn't
By the three hour mark I was so incensed, so enraged I was litterally
shaking. This was two weeks ago and I have been doing everything I can to
educate myself and others on the horrendous and intollerable state of things.
I have swayed two very feminist minded friends, one male and one female, to
the cause and I am currently in the process of creating posters and writing
messages on white boards through all of the buildings on campus. If people begin
to read your site and believe I think things will change.
I am an 18 (very soon to be 19) year old MALE Biology student, at the XXXXXX
[censored by AH] Institute of Technology in XX, USA. Your articles and site in
general have changed my life. I knew that I have been descriminated against for
my gender before but the degree to which it is happening sickens me.
Thank you for organizing such a magnificent display for mens rights. And I
want everyone who reads this to know that I have taken up the sword and shield
of men's rights and I will be fighting this battle for the rest of my life.
Thank you once again.
It's the bankers, Stupid ...
I have been reading your articles for hours and basically I agree. However,
you are blaming the radical women who could have done nothing on their own. It
is like husbands blaming their wives when it is the attorneys that file all the
papers and make all the decisions.
I cannot convince you in a brief email. However, why do the think the press
and the laws are so much alike in UK, USA, Australia, and Canada. If they were
truly independent countries, there would not be so much similarity on women's
Nick Rockefeller told Russo that the elite families created and financed the
women's lib movement so they could tax another half of the population and so
that the children would be trained by them in government schools rather than in
the context of the family unit. (See
the video interview.)
It is the international bankers that own the federal reserve and the national
banks that make all the decisions. They own the printing press, they can create
hundreds of billions if necessary to finance whatever. With the printing press
they have purchased control of the media and entertainment industry. If they
didn't agree, the radical women would have no outlet. They certainly don't have
the money to buy the media. These international bankers control most of the
politicians, the judges, and most every aspect of government. Few politicians
can get elected unless they are supported by the media.
Maybe there is a men's movement, but they don't have a hundred billion and
cannot raises 1/10 of one percent of that. And neither could the women. You are
limited to the internet and maybe at best a million in donations. The bankers,
using the government, radical women, and the media will outspend you and men's
movement by more than 10,000 to one.
I always have some degree of hope; however realistically, it may be hopeless.
Look how bad it was for the slaves before that world revolt during the Roman
times. Until it gets that bad, or almost that bad, it is unlikely that the men
Let me state quite categorically that I do not have any doubts at all
that very powerful forces are behind the feminists and their aims. And I
mentioned some of these in my piece entitled
Fathers Groups Miss The Big Picture.
It is quite clear to me that bankers, corporations and governments
are well aware that they have very much to gain for themselves if they can
continually stir up gender disharmony and, further, that they are doing exactly
To me, this is blatantly obvious. It is as clear as daylight!
And, as you say, this is why, for example, 'feminism' is rapidly taking hold
across the world.
The forces that promote feminism and relationship breakdown are incredibly
powerful. Unimaginably powerful.
But I tend to view them as arising from huge self-serving organisms that
dwell amongst us rather than as the result of a few highfaluting social
engineers (senior bankers, Bilderberg, etc) lording it over us.
I do not doubt that such social engineers exist at the top of the tree - the
'Illuminati', in the view of some - but these people simply could not wield such
huge power without the aid of the forces of the self-serving organisms of which
they are merely a tiny part.
If you like, these social engineers might be the train drivers - but they are
not the train!
My favourite way of demonstrating this is with reference to the senior
Japanese car-manufacturing executive who admitted that the TV adverts for his
cars (which showed women kicking men out of moving cars in a humorous way) were
likely to make women feel more assertive and more aggressive towards men and,
hence, as such, his company would likely sell more cars to women as they became
increasingly independent of men.
In other words, this is just one example of how stirring up gender disharmony
can result in the sale of more products - in this case, cars. But the same can
be said of very many other products - or 'services'; such as those provided by
However, the advertising department of this Japanese car company
would be tiny in comparison to the tens of thousands of workers who
actually build the cars, distribute them, sell them to the public
etc etc. And it is also tiny in comparison to the number of people
who actually buy the cars.
And so my point is this.
Yes; huge power is being wielded by a few
people working in the advertising department of this Japanese car company
(the 'illuminati' of the company) when it spends internationally millions
upon millions of dollars in such a manner that stirs up gender disharmony,
but this power is, nevertheless, dependent upon the millions
of other people who are necessarily involved in the buying and selling of
these cars - and, of course, this includes the customers who buy the cars.
And if some of these people - one or two million, say -
decide that they are unhappy with what the advertising department is
doing, then, in my view, the advertising department can quite easily be
persuaded to change its tune.
Indeed, if just a few of those people in the 'powerful' advertising
department can be persuaded (through fair means or foul) to change their
point of view or, perhaps, if they become disenchanted with what feminism
is doing to them, then, once again, the huge power that they wield can be
And, of course, if the general public can gradually be moved towards
experiencing misandry as distasteful - rather than as humorous - then
those in the advertising department will have to switch tactics in order
to sell their cars.
Thus, while I wholly accept your view that a few powerful people can
exert some truly massive forces in the direction of stirring up gender
disharmony, I do not accept that the MM can do nothing about this -
because these powerful people make up only a small fraction of the
organism of which they are a part.
Furthermore, my belief is that the MM is going to exert a force in the
future that is absolutely unparalleled and, further, that there is
absolutely no hope at all of stopping it.
Or - as I prefer to think about it - the organism of 'men' is
eventually going to be the largest social force on the planet - and
There are so many ways in which I can see this coming
about that I could easily write a book on it! And the main reason that I
do not bother to spell this all out hither and thither on this website is
that it just seems pointless to do so - because it wouldn't achieve
But I suppose that I can summarise all the possibilities by pointing
out that men are absolutely everywhere. From the wealthiest
of billionaires to the lowest of paupers, they are everywhere. They are in
high places and in low places. They do just about every important job that
And, of course, they are also working in the advertising department of
the aforementioned Japanese car company!
And when enough men - perhaps just a small percentage of them
- begin actively to undermine and oppose those people in
their field of vision who support the feminist agenda, the game will be
Indeed, there is only one thing that the MM really needs in order
In other words, it just needs to acquire an audience that is
significantly larger than the one that it currently has.
This is all that it needs.
From this, the rest will follow.
And, in my view, getting this attention is not going to be very hard to
do - thanks mostly to the internet.
Having said this, I must admit that I have been very surprised and
somewhat agitated at discovering how difficult it has been for the MM to
get some significant attention over the past few years but, nevertheless,
How can it not?
It is just not possible any longer for millions upon millions of men to
remain hugely dissatisfied with what is going on and yet do nothing about
this - in their own way.
My impression is that those in the higher echelons are still mostly
unaware of the forces that are stacking up against them and, further, it
is true to say that, at these higher levels, feminism is still being
pushed firmly onward - hence the seeming lack of progress of the MM.
But, closer to the ground, these forces are a-gathering, and I can see
them very clearly.
And my belief is that those who continue to stir up hatred towards men
and/or who promote polices that treat men badly will soon find themselves
in very serious trouble as MRAs operating both inside and outside their
organisations begin to target them.
Here is one recent example.
I received a communication from a man who is responsible for the
advertising of job positions within a certain government department. He
advised me that he had pulled some £75,000 of his advertising budget out
of the Guardian newspaper as a result of a piece that I had written.
Very small beans, I know. But beans such as these would grow and grow
if the MM was receiving more attention.
Furthermore, given the truly appalling manner in which so many men have
been treated by certain powerful groups and the utterly disgusting
self-serving nature of those who seem to be behind this, I have little
doubt that the MM will eventually turn into an extremely energetic and
One piece of evidence to support this point of view arises from the
fact that MRAs who understand what is going on remain as active
activists for years. They simply cannot let go - so enraged
are they by what they see happening.
I cannot tell you how many times I have seen long-time MRAs publicly
throwing in the towel - swearing blindly that they have had enough of all
the 'slow progress', and that they are going to do other things with their
lives - and yet, back they come, driven back into activism by something or
other that has happened in their world; perhaps just an item on the news.
And this inability to 'let go' happens because there is nowhere
to go to escape from all the misandry.
Once you have seen it, you cannot escape from it! - much as you would
And so, as I said above, all that the MM really needs is some more
attention - and then the ball will begin to roll - faster and faster -
continually energised by virtue of the fact that there is no escape for
those who have been 'enlightened'.
I suppose that I can summarise my response to you by saying this. Yes,
the forces that seek to profit from the stirring up of misandry, the
promotion of societal disharmony and the disempowerment of men are
absolutely, mind-bogglingly enormous.
But the Men's Movement is going to
be much more powerful than all of these forces combined - more powerful by
a very long way.
Furthermore, I can promise you that - at least here in the UK - our
message is getting through to - and being accepted by - certain
influential newspaper editors, a few politicians, senior police officers
and civil servants, judges, the military, the unions and others. But many
of these people remain stuck between a politically-corrected rock and a
feminist-inspired hard place - unable, at the moment, to move effectively
within their own spheres of influence.
They have to tread lightly!
But many of them are, clearly, gradually jiggling their way out of
their restraints and they will begin soon to open up the door to some
very serious activism on our own parts; after which, the
floodgates will begin to open.
This sort of thing has taken much, much longer to materialise than I
ever envisaged would be the case (I didn't appreciate just how powerful
was the stranglehold) but it is very definitely happening.
With regard to your point about bankers, governments and corporations
wanting women to be in the workplace so that they can profit themselves, I
do not think that women being in the workplace is a problem. After all,
women should be in the workplace, shouldn't they?
The problem for men is not women going out to work, the problem is the
huge amount of mistreatment, misandry and disadvantage being heaped upon
men through one avenue or another.
And with regard to your most valid point about governments wanting a
greater sway over the children in order to indoctrinate them etc etc, I
simply point out that when the Men's
eventually dominates the government - which it will - this indoctrination
will be fashioned more appropriately.
Let me re-state that the MM only really needs some significant increase
in the amount of attention that it gets. There are so many ways in which
the MM can then exert its influence that there will be no hope of standing
in its way.
And - since I am on this subject - the only reason that even many MRAs
remain sceptical about this point of view is because, to put it bluntly,
they are still not thinking 'outside of the box' and they often limit
themselves to thinking only about 'formal' mechanisms of activism.
A good example of this type of limited thinking was exhibited by the
Canadian feminist Professor Pierrette Bouchard when she wanted to get
funding to monitor men's websites for anti-feminist rhetoric - which she
described as 'hate speech' - and to have them closed down. My response to
her was to send her the URL of my taunting piece
Canadian Feminists Getting Worried
to show her that she had no hope of blocking anti-feminist activism. She
never replied. LOL! But the point here is simply to demonstrate that there
are now so many ways in which the feminists can be undermined that there
is no hope of stopping this.
Another example of this limited thinking was the way in which
Fathers4Justice - at the very height of its successes publicity-wise -
failed completely and utterly to direct the huge numbers of visitors to
its website to any other men's groups. The result was that
this large number of visitors to its website - many of who were
journalists - remained blissfully unaware that there were many other
serious issues that men were being badly affected by - i.e. issues other
than child access problems - and that there were many other men's
activists engaging with them. And Fathers4Justice therefore came across to
much of the world at the time as a small group of isolated nutcases who
were probably making a fuss about nothing.
It was very much a lost opportunity - all that was required were a few
URL links on its website - and a further consequence was that a large
number of activists (particularly in the USA) then gave up actively
But, there we go. The MM is still very young. The activists are not
funded. They are mostly inexperienced. They have no effective power base.
And the forces which are stacked against them are - as you have said
- truly colossal.
Nevertheless, I would say that they are doing rather well given the
Just wait and see what they do in the future!
From AH's missus ...
Angry Harry you are so cool. Take a look at this. It will put a smile upon
Stop pestering me with your emails Bi#ch, or I'll find a Russian woman who
BTW; That devious ho's cholesterol level turned out to be 3.5. In other
words, she is probably going to live to be 100. So, Yep; that's right Boys,
Angry Harry, man o' the world, and slayer of all things foul and feminist, is
probably going to be stuck with this scheming harlot for another four decades.
Oh cruel world.
Cruel, cruel world.
Some of your questions answered ...
Firstly, I must apologise if I have not replied to your emails, but I just do
not have the time.
Anyway. Here are some short answers to questions that keep
cropping up. They are in no special order, and I am now going to zap through
some of my emails to refresh my memory.
1. Yes. The MM is very definitely growing. I do not just say this to
keep the troops motivated.
2. No. I have not visited a forum in ages. I know that some people post stuff
on forums on my behalf - and it sometimes looks as if it comes from me - but me
it is not.
3. Yes. I do nowadays post various comments on mainstream media sites - but
not under the name Angry Harry. I have a fistful of aliases and email addresses.
However, most of what I write goes on this website.
4. No. I am not a police officer or a closet agent for MI5, MI6 or the
FBI. I genuinely believe that our law enforcement agencies need to
be able to access more information about potential terrorists or criminals. In
particular, I want a national DNA database to be set up, and I can see no valid
reason for being scared of one.
5. No. I am not a racist. I couldn't give two hoots about the colour of
people's skins or their racial backgrounds.
6. No. I am not concerned that some of my articles might induce aggression
against government officials such as judges or politicians. Why should I be
concerned? These people seem to have no qualms at all about destroying
completely the lives of others. Indeed, how many men commit suicide and even
murder as a result of the policies of these self-serving corrupt officials?
Hundreds every year - in the UK alone.
And they do not give a damn.
7. No. I have never had any aggravation at all from sources
allied to government.
8. I do not link to MND because MND does not link to me - but, yes, I do
visit MND. Furthermore, I think that Mike LaSalle deserves far more support and
credit than he ever gets. And if MND was to vanish, it would be a monumental
loss to the MM.
9. Yes. I do like Glenn Sacks very much. Indeed, I think that Glenn Sacks is
a truly top-notch activist - and, quite probably, the best all-round activist in
10. Yes. I do receive emails from feminists but I do not post them up. I see
no reason to give feminists a voice on this website and I can see no benefit
that would arise from doing so. Besides which, they never really say anything of
value. Their emails are usually completely devoid of anything but worn-out
empty-headed unsubstantiated assertions - usually coupled with a strong sense of
Women are victims. Women are victims. Women are victims.
are just as good as men. Women are just as good as men.
... just about
sums them all up.
11. I am 56 years old.
12. Heretical Sex is my favourite blogger - closely followed by
13. Yes. I think that politicians like Harriet Harman should one day
be prosecuted for purposely, knowingly and maliciously stirring up
hatred towards an entire class of people - men - for persistently
deceiving the public, and for corrupting the justice system to such
an extent that hundreds of thousands
of men every year are treated absolutely appallingly as a result.
Indeed, I think that it is important that people like her are
strongly punished and publicly vilified so that never again will our
politicians willfully stir up hatred towards their very own people
and cause so much distress and hurt to so many of them.
It is one thing for politicians to make mistakes. It is quite
another for them to persist in causing serious - and, often,
lifelong - damage to people - particularly when they are fully aware
of what they are doing.
Which she is.
14. In my view, the most important issue that the MM should currently be
addressing concerns 'the government'.
I believe that most departments of western governments need to be reduced
in terms of both size and power. Their ability to interfere in the work
place and in the home needs to be diminished. The amount of red tape needs
to be cut down dramatically, and all policies and procedures relating to
political correctness need to be discarded; e.g. no more 'diversity' or
'gender equality' officers, no more corrupt family courts, no more
prosecutions of men without strong evidence that a crime has actually been
I also think that government officials should be prosecuted when
they cover up wrongdoing, whereas government whistleblowers should
be protected by law from any retribution.
And I could go on!
But I won't.
I will just say this.
Very few of you out there realise just
how malicious, uncaring and self-serving are those who nowadays work in
the higher echelons of government.
15. My favourite books are to do with
Science. My favourite 'films' are documentaries - though I quite like good
thrillers such as the Bourne series.
16. Yes. Everything I write, I
believe. And nowadays I really do try my best not to exaggerate - unless I
am attempting to be humorous - but, sometimes, my anger gets the better of
me - and so I sometimes find myself having to re-write bits that I posted
And now I am off to bed.
I am a bit worried at the moment,
and I need to rest myself, because my missus is going off to have her
cholesterol checked tomorrow morning - and if its level is but a
micro-nano-milli-mol outside of the optimum, it's lettuce leaves, boiled
cabbage, tofu and porridge for everybody for at least a month!
on the BBC covering up news which exposes women making false
Tracy Brooks falsely accused 5 guys of rape, and avoided jail. The story shows
a daily mail web page and a Sun web page, but the BBC has so far not covered
it, on TV, radio or even the internet. I phoned their complaints department, and
have had THEM write to ME, explaining why they chose not to cover the story. I
ask you to implore your readers to do the same. I have emailed therightsofman ,
and will email mensactivism next. Let's make this as time-consuming an issue as
possible for the BBC, so it remembers not to ignore these stories in the future.
Thanks for your great website, as always.
on men being allowed to rape their wives ...
your piece pointing out that the Home Office
likes to equate rape allegations with actual rapes.
Only a couple of days ago, on 'The Wright
Stuff', Matthew Wright referred to men being
allowed to rape their wives prior to 1992.
Obviously this is not true because a man could
not *rape* his wife before 1992.
This is a typical distortion of the truth by those with a feminist-dominated
In the olden days, if it was thought - e.g. by the police or other men - that
you had raped your wife - or any other woman - the chances are very high that
you would have been beaten up by them.
Does anyone really think that men who opened doors for women, gave up their
chairs to them, etc etc, simply sat by while men happily raped their wives? -
wives who would also be sisters, daughters, mothers, friends?
My belief is that a lack of the law in this area arose for at least the
1. It was known that it would be virtually impossible to prove rape in
marital cases - as is the situation today. And, as with most other prospective
laws that cannot be enforced easily, such laws tend not to be enacted.
2. The government did not have the power to interfere with families in those
days because, quite simply, the government was not very powerful then. Indeed,
officials who interfered with family life were likely to get the whole community
raging after them, and this would then lead to the government losing power in
many other areas - such as happens today in various crime-ridden communities.
3. Until the huge distortions of the feminists arrived on the scene -
buttressed by a mighty force via the media - it was probably well-recognised by
most people that many women are prone to lying about being 'abused' in some way
- usually in order to get other men to aggress on their behalf. Indeed, one of
the main reasons that 'no-fault' divorce was introduced was because government
officials - judges - recognised that it was virtually impossible to sort out the
ins and outs of people with a long intimate history together who were now
fighting each other in the divorce courts.
In other words, the people and the government accepted the fact that when
intimates are at each others throats, you cannot get to the truth behind their
Clearly, they still believe this to be the case when it comes to divorce.
(But, perversely, they do not believe this to be the case when it comes to
domestic violence and marital rape!)
4. The attitude of both government and the people in the past was very much
in line with the view that people were actually responsible for their own
personal decisions. (What an amazing idea!) And so, for example, if two people
stayed together then that was their choice. If they did not like each other's
behaviour then they could always part company. Furthermore, the attitude was
that marriage was a very serous affair and that if people embarked upon it then
it was up to them to make sure that they had made the right choice, and they
also had to realise that they were, in effect, becoming one person.
5. A common female attitude towards sex with their husbands was that they
should just "lie back and think of England" whenever their husbands wanted sex
when they did not. This is now called 'rape'. The reality, however, was that
most wives recognised that their husbands were labouring for many hours every
day on their behalf and it was their husbands who brought back the goodies for
the family. And submitting to him sexually was part of the deal - something
which both parties understood.
And one of the reasons for this understanding was that it was well-recognised
that men were mostly attracted to women because of their personal
attractiveness, whereas women were more influenced by a man's wealth - or
Now, a woman's attractiveness fades over time, but a man's wealth tends to
accumulate. And so one good way of keeping the balance was to advise the wives
to keep up their sexiness levels regardless of their feelings - hence, "lie back
and think of England".
This was not 'rape'. This was part of the deal.
And it was quite a good deal from a woman's point of view.
After all, when the children are older and do not need much care, and the
wife has grown older and become less attractive, what is left when it
comes to marriage for the man?
Why should he spend his increasing wealth on her?
(Remember: We are talking about 'rape' situations, not about those married
couples who got along well.)
Well, part of the deal was that she submitted to him sexually. And if she did
not keep to this part of the deal then both men and women would
have said that she was unworthy of being his 'wife'.
After all, he continues doing all the work and providing all the goodies -
and she is doing virtually nothing; except pottering around the house and
chatting with her neighbours.
(Indeed, this was one of the main complaints of 'feminists'
around the 1860s. They were not complaining about rape or domestic violence or
discrimination in the workplace. They were complaining about women having
nothing of value to do once the children were older.)
Furthermore, the notion that females can get males to do almost anything in
return for sex was figured out even before the arrival of chimpanzees.
And you will see women all over the world using sex to get
what they want.
(Indeed, men were actually designed to fall for this kind of
manipulation; e.g. see Women and Chimps.
Those men who failed to fall for the sexual manipulations of women, failed to
In other words, submitting sexually to your husband - who had to toil through
long hours of work every day - was never in the past considered to be a big
And, in fact, most women recognised it as a good deal.
It is only because we are nowadays dominated by the views of dysfunctional
feminist women - most of who hate men - that having sex with your husband when
you are not in the mood is considered to be an act of 'rape'.
All in all, therefore, it was not the case that it was all right for a
husband to 'rape' his wife. The situation was that, in practice, it was not
possible to enforce a law which prohibited such an event. It was impossible to
determine if such an event had taken place. It was known that women lie about
such things. It was believed by both men and women that women had
some kind of duty to recompense the men who laboured on their behalf and, of
course, it was recognised that bringing the law into 'the home' would likely
cause huge disruption to the whole of society - which is exactly
what has now happened.
But the claim that it was considered 'acceptable' for a husband to 'rape' his
wife is utter nonsense. A husband who did such a thing might have got away with
it, but there is no way that such a thing was considered to be 'acceptable'.
And by 1908 ...
The wife has but to scream and appeal to the nearest policeman, and
prison, separation, custody of children, and maintenance, are decreed as matters
of course. Belfort Bax (1908)
on men should not look at buildings in which children once were ...
I was alerted to your site recently by a work colleague and am glad to see
that you link to the Manifesto Club.
Last week the club received the following email from a Mr Parker.
'Last week I was watching some building work on an empty old school
building near me being renovated when two police officers came and demanded my
details and photo ID. They said it was because in their judgement I had
displayed "an unhealthy interest in children", which was amazing because there
was not a single child to be seen, anywhere. The children were all at a brand
new building which can't even be seen from where I was standing."
on Where are all the Sex Slaves? - and how it all works in Sweden ...
I have just read your latest article on trafficking entitled “Where Are All
The Sex Slaves?” I agree with your comment regarding the substantial incentives
for these women to lie, claiming to have been forced into this particulair
industry against their will. What a crazy situation indeed where incentives are
given to people to lie rather than tell the truth.
I live in Sweden where prostitution is illegal. This means of course 'illegal
to buy' but not 'illegal to sell', as of course all women who sell sex are total
victims who are forced into it by evil men or cruel life circumstances beyond
their control..... You get my point.
The concept of free will does`nt seem to apply to females anymore (Did it
ever??). Anyway - the feminist brigade in Sweden (almost the entire population
btw.) are thus faced with the problem of how to explain why so many young middle
class Swedish women still sell their bodies for money, both in Sweden as well as
in even richer countries like Saudi Arabia or Japan and, more importantly, why
so many eastern european women come to Sweden to “ply their trade”.
Feminists have no real explanation for why young middle class western women
still continue to sell their bodies both at home, other than that all these
girls are probably addicted to hard drugs. On the other hand these same
feminists choose generally to keep very quiet about middle class swedish girls
who sell sex in Japan and other rich countries . When it comes to eastern block
women though, feminists just repeat the same old mantra - that these women are
forced through violence or decieved by manipulative svengali type males who get
them here on the pretext of working as nannies or waitresses!
If you are a criminal in Russia or Estonia working in the sex trade, with the
job of recruiting, say, 20 women to work in Sweden in an underground brothel
then it obviously makes sense to get 20 women who will co-operate and who will
work voluntarily rather than instead try to trick or threaten 20 “normal women”
who would probably be horrified at the prospect of working as a prostitute.
These women would not be “good workers”, neither could they be trusted not to
escape and blow the whistle to the authorities at the first available
opportunity, ending the whole lucrative enterprise and putting the organisers in
An operation of this scale takes a hell of a lot of organising I would
imagine. People need to be employed as couriers to bring the girls over. False
work permits and other credentials would also presumably be needed, premises and
apartments would need to be rented where the girls can live and work. Maybe most
important of all clients/customers for the girls would also need to be made
available. All this takes manpower, time, effort and money in order to get the
enterprise up and running – it does`nt just happen. There is also a huge risk
involved to the organisers too, as the whole enterprise is illegal.
But such an organisation does stand to make alot of money - for everyone
involved. If these girls have sex with 5 customers per day at £60 a time then
just 1 girl can earn £300 per day!!! That is over £2000 per week or over £8000
per month - taxfree!!! It beggars belief how much 20 girls could earn in a
month, but it would be plenty enough to go around I would imagine. Everone wins!
– JUST AS LONG AS THE ENTERPRISE RUNS SMOOTHLY and the authorities don`t catch a
whiff of whats going on - which is why it would be madness to trick and coerce
these women when there would be so many hardened “professional girls”
presumably, in these eastern european countries, who would gladly do the work
without having to be manipulated or threatened!!!
Even if these women only kept 20% of their earnings then they would still
earn £1600 per month each – taxfree!!! How many Russians or Estonians earn that
much a month after tax??? I bet that even doctors over there don`t earn that
The bottom line is that Russian women come to richer contries like Sweden and
sell sex, for the same reason that Swedish women go to richer countries to sell
sex – because it is an easy way for them to make a lot of money – much more than
they would otherwise be able to make working in a clothes shop or behind a
perfume counter somewhere. The majority of these women are not starving and
destitute and they are not forced in any way to do what they do. They are
exercizing their free will as adults and they do it presumably because they want
a better standard of living (materialistically speaking).
My guess is that if these girls are addicted to anything then it is, more
often than not, their own consumer spending – rather than hard drugs like
PS. It happens in Sweden just the same as you described in the article. When
these prostitution rings get busted and the women admit to coming here of their
own free will, they get penalized and sent straight back. But - if they roll
over and play victim, blaming the nearest man, then they are given all the
benefits you described.
on women being given even further financial inducements to make false
I just read that 'victims' of rape will be allowed to sue their 'attackers' for
... I barely need to imprint on you the significance of this ruling.
From now on, women will regularly seek to make false allegations -
particularly against wealthy men - since they can do so with full
anonymity and are VERY unlikely to be punished if caught-out. Women who
make false allegations stand to make MILLIONS of pounds. Due to this
ruling, innocent men will lose their lives, liberty and property.
Wealthy men are rendered particularly vulnerable by this ruling. There
isn't a woman alive who wouldn't consider making a false allegation if she
stood to gain a considerable sum of money.
If I were Peter Stringfellow [a wealthy nightclub owner] I'd be VERY
I wonder if men will be allowed to seek similar complaints against women
who make false allegations? I wonder if PIGS MIGHT FLY!!!
And this doesn't just apply to rich men; ANY man who has more than a few
grand in the bank or who owns a house or who has ANY future earning
capacity is a potential target.
I would merely add that this ruling is completely consistent with the
very essence of feminism - the desire to make it virtually
impossible for men and women to have close relationships - in this case,
by further encouraging women to make false accusations and by making men
more fearful of having close relationships with women.
As I am forever saying, the major driving force behind
the feminists is a hatred of men - nothing else explains
what they say and do - and their left-wing friends in power support them
because they profit very handsomely indeed - to the tune of billions
of dollars - from promoting inter-gender disharmony and relationship
With regard to any wealthy men who get taken to the cleaners, I can
only say that they should have given more support to websites such as this
new devious tactics to entrap men ...
I thought you may find this news story of interest, since it is yet another
example of the state agenda's attempts to oppress men in the name of 'justice'.
Whilst an individual of your experience will doubtless realise this for
yourself, the practice described is flawed in both its premise and execution:
In premise, it assumes that the low conviction rate is due to some
'miscarriage of justice' rather than an excess of false accusations. This is
nothing new to the Rape illusion.
In practice, the example described to elicit a confession is exceptionally
As an aside, I would like to thank you for all the work you have put in to
your site. Having been a male 'victim' for so long, I say without a modicum of
insincerity that some of your work has helped my emotional recovery from a
mindset that threatened my career. As a male Oxford student, this has rescued my
degree and should see me continue my studies in the US in medical
Fortunately I no longer feel obliged to earn lots of money in a job that saps
my soul in order that I might attempt to please a materialistic Western woman.
Thanks again for your hard work,
on rape ...
your view on this appreciated.
Peter Hitchens expressed a proposal that in order to get more convictions he
would like to see rape laws devolved into 2nd degree and probably even 3rd
I am totally against this,
I say if a man is convicted of any degree of rape his life is virtually over.
It is not necessarily the length of term which is important.
However ,although all my arguments were cogent and totally non abusive using
your and other sites conclusions I was flamed for "spam comment". Free
I must confess that this "degrees of rape" issue is not something that I have
really thought about.
And one reason for my lack of thought about the matter is that I do not
really see it as being very important.
Why? - because the public's attitude towards women who allege rape is going
to continue changing in a direction that is less favourable toward them - thanks
to the activities of the MM and, of course, thanks to the appallingly high
number of false accusations that are made by lying women.
Furthermore, it is already the case that juries in the UK are mostly
unconvinced about the veracity of most current rape claims and, in my view, the
more that the justice system is corrupted simply in order to gain more
convictions, the more will the public and the juries refuse to co-operate; e.g.
Futile Changes by James Cox - in the Guardian!
Indeed, thanks to the growing MM, and thanks to the internet, the more that
men are mistreated, the bigger will be the backlash and the more powerful will
the MM grow.
And, of course, with regard to the rape issue, it will not just be 'women'
who will bear the brunt of the backlash that arises from this, it will be the
justice system and the politicians as well.
But I do agree very strongly with your view that, currently, a
man's life is ruined whatever 'degree' of rape he is convicted of.
However, in the long term, I suspect that if there are increasing numbers of
men who are convicted of minor degrees of rape - or accused of such, but
convicted - then 'rape' will become something of a joke - a bit like what has
happened with regard to shoplifting - and, for example, comedians will start
fooling around with humorous scenarios that, allegedly, constitute 'rapes'.
And so, all in all, I am not too worried about the dividing of 'rape' into
different degrees because this will help to energise the MM quite significantly
while the collateral damage (the number of falsely accused men) will be
Indeed, thanks to the internet, the same sort of logic is clearly going to
apply in many areas of concern to men.
In the past, 'men' were unable to protest effectively. And so whenever 'men'
were being mistreated or disadvantaged they just had to sit back and take it.
But those days are over. And, henceforth, every injustice will play right into
On Mark Read, otherwise known as, Chopper ...
Dear Angry Harry
I just saw your reference [Homosexual Sadism]
to a commercial featuring Mark "Chopper " Read on the Swartz Foundation web
site. I absolutely agree with your comments about this. I find the use of
threats to men who go to gaol for wife beating rather stupid. What about the
women who bash and even kill their husbands but never get gaol time?
What an imbalance! As for Mark Read, he has been on TV over here on a number
of occasions notably on the Elle Mcfeast program where he was discussing how he
killed other criminals. Disgusting stuff really. He is the author of several
books on his life in gaol etc.
I wonder what the publics reaction would be to a TV commercial where women
who bash their husbands are threatened with violence if they go to gaol.
It seems that its quite OK to inflict violence on men and we are supposed to
just take it . This has got to change, and I think its people doing what you do
that will bring this change about.