Women against feminism, it is about time.
But what about women against gynocetrism. How many women opposing feminism don’t simply want more free stuff. How many are not simply angry their traditional advantages over men were accidentally wrecked by the growing toxicity of modern gender ideology.
Susan B Anthony in an address at an open supper by the Daughters of Temperance said in 1849:
It is generally conceded that it is our sex that fashions the social and moral state of society. We do not presume that females possess unbounded power in abolishing the evil customs of the day; but we do believe that were they en masse to discountenance the use of wine and brandy as beverages at both their public and private parties, not one of the opposite sex, who has any claim to the title of gentleman, would so insult them as to come into their presence after having quaffed of that foul destroyer of all true delicacy and refinement.
So we have a class of people who openly concede that they have superior social and moral power in society. They acknowledge that by the mere expression of collective disapproval, they can influence male decisions and behaviour on a grand scale.
Of course, this superior social and moral power was not enough, in 1849, for even the women who then understood it. Added to superior moral and social power, they also wanted at least equal political and economic power. But where was their discussion about ceding any of their superior social and moral authority to men?
Along comes the MHRM pointing out that this superior moral and social authority, coupled with equal political and economic status, is a blueprint for supremacy.
This obvious fact, stated against a deafening chorus of feminist disavowal of any part in changing legislation or domestic policy. Those changes often accomplished against the consensus of the voting public! But it was never feminist lobbying obviously, because “feminism just isn’t that powerful”.
Meanwhile, in another part of the forest:
The legalization of female on male spousal murder is pursued in plain public view by LEAF front-man and University of Ottawa Professor of Law Elizabeth Sheehy.
The response from feminists is “men are just objecting to losing their privilege”. In reality this response, like most feminist assertions, is simple psychological projection. Women have at least equal political and economic status to men. In fact, it can be reasonably argued that modern women have superior political and economic power than men.
What feminists do NOT want is for men to have equal moral and social authority to women.
This results in concerted efforts by feminists to keep men out of the discussion on gender issues, while claiming that men already hold all the power in said discussions.
And because of their superior social and moral authority, women are able to dictate this obvious contradiction as if it is reality.
Among the unacknowledged powers possessed by women is that of the creation and maintenance of social reality. That is to say, the ability to create and maintain a publicly accepted social narrative which ignores or contradicts observable reality.
Yes, we need women’s voices to expose this sham of an “equality movement” for what it is–snake oil and supremacy.
We don’t need is another female centred ideology with the same covert goals of wealth appropriation, and social and legal marginalization. This “new” ideology displacing the present pre-eminent gender ideology with one different only in it’s rhetoric and tactics.
Entering the war against civil society by feminists is a new player. It’s a player quickly dwarfing and eclipsing the Men’s Human Rights Movement. The public face of this new player is Women Against Feminism.
Some of the women against feminism are participating out of their own intelligence and for their own reasons. Those reasons are egalitarian, humanitarian and coincide, at least in part, with long term goals of the MHRM.
But many women against feminism admit it is feminism’s toxicity that has alerted men to their own exploitation and marginalization. This exploitation exists both in feminist society, as well as in traditional gynocentric society. And, that awareness has turned men away from their historic woman favouring and female-provisioning behaviour.
But the traditionalists in the WAF movement have the weight and political muscle of the established political right behind them.
No psychic powers are needed to predict that such an established power will supplant and eclipse the MHRM.
And there’s the mystery. Few Men’s Human Rights Activists even see it. Some of the most prominent MRAs are gleefully embracing Women Against feminism as if it is simply an awakening of women’s consciousness.
Are we to swallow the idea that until now, women have been somehow ignorant of the continued human harm perpetrated by the political left’s flavour of gynocentrism?
To grant such a pass requires that women be both foolish and ignorant. Regardless of the picture sold to the public by mainstream feminism, they are not.
But traditionalist women have lost much of their their hold over traditionalist men. They have lost access to the free stuff that comes with being provisioned in a traditional gender role society, and they’re mad as hell at feminists for ruining the deal.
But none of us live, anymore in a 1930’s faming community in which men’s labor and physical strength is required for that community’s survival. Women, using modern technology can do the work men used to do by hand.
The low technology lives lived by previous generations are what drove the necessary economy of gendered roles.
But as a movement, we’re apparently ready to uncritically embrace gynocentric traditionalism. Is it because a powerful lobby is now backing women against feminism. Really?
Is it simply because they too oppose the left’s version of our culture’s gynocentric drive, and because they’ve got more influence and reach than we in the MHRM do. Is that why we are suspending our critical faculties?
The political right has been hocking versions of “Dear men, kindly get back on the treadmill” for decades. Is WAF the marketing Men’s Human Rights Activists will finally be taken in by? So, do we now abandon the MRM, and like good little worker bees – re-commence feeding the machine with our corpses?
We do not ride on the railroad; it rides upon us. Did you ever think what those sleepers are that underlie the railroad? Each one is a man…. The rails are laid on them, and they are covered with sand, and the cars run smoothly over them. They are sound sleepers, I assure you. And every few years a new lot is laid down and run over; so that, if some have the pleasure of riding on a rail, others have the misfortune to be ridden upon.
~1854: Henry David Thoreau
But we actually don’t need men to build railroads, or harvest crops, or do most of the necessary, dangerous heavy work which required gender roles in the past. Men are more unnecessary than ever before. But we’re going to embrace a traditional social model now? The one in which men’s value is tied directly to their capability to do things like harvest timber, operate heavy machinery and die on the job?
A more powerful plan for male disposability, disenfranchisement and marginalization is hard to imagine.
This is not to suggest that Women against Feminism should be flatly rejected. Women against feminism is a good start. It does deserve our support.
However, feminism is just one political manifestation, from the left, of gynocentrism. Replacing one form of corruption with another, more polished, older, more practiced form is no solution at all.