Please feel free to copy and distribute the above articles
|
‘Women do not find it difficult nowadays to behave like men; but they often find it extremely difficult to behave like gentlemen.’
Sir Compton Mackenzie 1883-1972 ‘On Moral Courage’
|
| "I want males to unite and form a Brotherhood, in which they defend each other at all times, work as a team. A team of men can achieve anything they want. A team of women can only be destructive. Women work as a team, and unopposed they have degraded society. Men need to unite as Team Men and stand up to Team Women."
Chris Key, MRA
|
Future
Tech:
Films :
(007)
& here
| In Hinduism, women are often referred to as 'Avidya', which means "the embodiment of illusion". |
|
R.A.Q.s (Rarely asked questions) If women truly want to be treated no differently from men in the workplace, why do they smother their faces in make-up, and wear sexy clothes?
Why is the expression "Be a man" only ever used to get us to do things that are against our best interests?
Why is it that any man who didn't risk his life for the sake of others in World War 1, World War 2, The Sinking of the Titanic or 9/11 was deemed cowardly-scum, but no-one would ever think that of the women who did the same? |
|
QUOTE: "I
have no doubt that, someday, the distortion of truth by the radical
feminists of our time will be seen to have been the greatest intellectual
crime of the second half of the twentieth century. At the present time,
however, we still live under the aegis of that crime, and calling attention
to it is an act of great moral courage". |
The men's movement online
Prevention of Misandry in the Media
Since when was it about equality anyway?
The National Organisation for men
Downloadable e-books
If Men have all the Power, how come Women make the Rules?
Links & Resources
Updates:
Fathers for justice people power documentary (YouTube)
Children perform better if mother stays at home
Men talk to Google not girlfriends (a
silly piece, written in a misandric style, but it underlies the
trend towards men spending more time interacting with their
computers than with women).
A 4 minute video on the making of the 1960s TV shows Stingray
and Thunderbirds!
The
teaching company: great lecture courses on CD, DVD and Mp3
The simple living network: free reports on living cheaply
Kevin Kelly:
Civilisations are creatures
Peter Cochrane:
Has academia lost its usefulness?
A real life Super Mario
experience: The
Nintendo Amusement park
Fashionable
Guerrillas:
For the Left, noble revolutionaries are always in style.
Good web tool:
Furl, your personal web file
Competition in science:
The X Prize Foundation, famous for initiating the race for the
first private spaceship, is starting numerous other prizes in
the areas of genetics, nanotechnology, education and clean
automotives.
Disaster preparation:
How
to survive a tsunami
Online shop for geeks:
Think Geek
Genetics:
Most Americans wouldn't choose their child's sex if given the
choice, according to a new survey.
(And here's the
UK link, and the
Canadian link)
And if that is too serious for
you, Maddox - creator of the highly popular (and hilarious)
website is bringing out a book called 'The A-Z of Manliness'.
A number of new men's sites and
blogs have appeared over the last few weeks, here are some of
them:
Thursday 20th April
Keep an eye on the
Cool Tools 4 Men Blog
as most updates will be
appearing there for the foreseeable future.
Monday 17th April
*NEW*
The Cool Tools 4
Men Blog
Friday 14th April
Happy Easter to all my readers.
"for the years 1998-2005 global
average temperature did not increase (there was actually a
slight decrease, though not at a rate that differs significantly
from zero)...
A period of warming occurred
between 1918 and 1940, well prior to the greatest phase of world
industrialisation, and that cooling occurred between 1940 and
1965, at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing
at their greatest rate. "
Space:
Saturn's tiny moon Enceladus may be the best place to look for
life elsewhere in the Solar System.
Feminism and political
correctness have contributed more than anything else to this
culture of nihilism. For example, there has been an erosion of
the recognition of the difference between good and evil. If
anyone behaves in a fashion that used to be called 'evil' - such
as physically attacking and seriously injuring someone with no
good reason - it is merely excused away by saying that its a
consequence of poverty (induced by the Patriarchy, of course),
or of 'low self esteem' (also courtesy of the Patriarchy).
Anything more than a cursory investigation of these excuses
quickly reveals what BS they are.
The success of the feminist and
politically correct/socialist lobbies has also degraded the
respect that people had for telling the truth. The way to
succeed in life is now seen to be just to loudly demand respect.
People don't own up to their misdeeds, they are not truly sorry
for hurting others, only that they have been caught. Also, it
seems that the state and the police are caring less about
serious crime, yet are increasingly eager to criminalise
ordinary people for the most petty things, and - like all good
socialist states - to prosecute people for 'thought crimes'. Its
a sick joke that the idiots who support such socialist
anti-freedom laws declare themselves to be 'liberal'.
There has also been an erosion in
the discipline and boundaries of behaviour observed by
youngsters, thanks amongst other things to the feminist era's
removal of fathers from the lives of many children. The
feminist's destruction of the family has also ended up
destroying the ability of communities to look after themselves
and ensure that people can walk around reasonably free of the
fear of encountering uncivil or violent behaviour.
Lastly, the lack of values and
fairness in this new feminist society has left many, many young
men feeling a deep violent rage within. Most them don't burn off
this angry energy by writing about it, but eventually lash out
at someone.
And women accuse men of being
superficial! However, this study seems to me to be too contrived
to tell us anything definitive about how people judge potential
partners in the real world.
Woman complains about death of
chivalry:
Chivalry:
The idea that part of being a man (and certainly part of being a
gentleman) is to sacrifice willingly to protect those who are
more vulnerable.
Actually, that is a very
incomplete definition of chivalry. A more complete one can be
found at Wikipedia:
Also see Pete Jensen's classic
article:
One-sided chivalry
That's right, chivalry is not
just about treating ALL women as special Disney Princesses, it
was a medieval code of honour that was as much about class and
fighting codes, not to mention placing certain expectations upon
those women who were the recipients of this special treatment
(i.e. requiring them to deport themselves in a lady-like manner,
and to demur to men in many situations).
What women like Ms Lukas fail to
realise is that the society that made chivalric behaviour work
is long gone. In fact, the manly virtues that gave birth to the
chivalric code are actually the very virtues that make men see
it as totally inappropriate to today's world. Specifically: an
expectation and respect for fairness and consistency
in people.
Fairness = you give respect as
well as receive it.
Consistency = you don't pretend
to be something that you are not, and you live up to your
promises. You don't declare yourself no different from a man,
then expect special treatment from him in other situations.
What this boils down to is some
very naive women signing up for a 'something for nothing'
philosophy' whereby they can attain the benefits of the past,
without any of its restrictions (eg would Ms Lukas equally like
to see a return to the strict class-defined society of the
Victorian era whereby it was also mainly the lower class
passengers as well as the men who died in the Titanic disaster?
Would she like to give up her voting rights? Would she like to
return to a system where women's sexual activity was more
regulated?).
Women bought into feminism and
destroyed the world that allowed chivalric behaviour to exist.
Now they want a refund. But you can only get a refund if you
return the goods.
Lastly, in the situation of
surviving in the cold waters of the North Atlantic, most *MEN*
would have been more vulnerable than the women, as the men would
have had less body fat to keep them warm.
What really grates on these right
wing feminists (or 'women firsters' as I call them) is that men
are no longer so indoctrinated as to believe a small memorial
plaque is a good exchange for their life. Such women act like
pushy, ball-busting warrioresses when it comes to competing with
men for a job, yet turn into simpering little kittens when it
comes to some situation in which they expect the man to
sacrifice his money, comfort or even his life for her.
That modern men are now able to
see through this crude con trick is a good thing.
Wednesday 12th April
Innovation of the year?:
Fake, soiled underpants for home security
Warning, not for the
feint-hearted!
Project Shawshank,
named after a movie where a prisoner escapes to Mexico, is for
any man who, for whatever reason, wants to try his luck in a new
country.
Tuesday 11th April
Blog:
Mercurior's Meme
Machine
Video:
Real life Simpsons intro!
Search the Web from your laptop or handheld -- without
an Internet connection of any kind?
Saturday 8th April: Darren's 30th
Birthday, and the 2nd birthday of Cool Tools 4 Men!
Friday 7th April
Extreme longevity?:
The claims made by Dr Aubrey de Grey, a scientist at the
University of Cambridge, UK, that lifespan can be increased by
over 1,000 years, have proven too much for some; and a dispute
has now broken out within the gerontology community.
Holographic data storage:
InPhase
Technologies claims to have broken the record for the highest
data density of any commercial storage technology after
successfully recording 515Gb of data per square inch.
(warning: this article may
try to print - just click cancel if you don't want to print it)
Brain-computer interface:
A specialised microchip that could communicate with thousands of
individual brain cells has been developed by European
scientists.
Thursday 6th April
Modern women are more interested in a man's looks than how rich
he is
Hm, I'm inclined to file this
under 'I'll believe it when I see it'.
Lets find the holes in this
report (its not hard). There are three holes so huge you could
fly a 747 through them.
Firstly, the correct title (based
on what it reports the evidence to show) should be: "Looks are
now more important than wealth for higher earning women." One of
the main pitfalls with reporting statistical type results in the
media is that the public 'take home' message from the study
tends to become grossly simplified into black-and-white. For
example, lets imagine a hypothetical study that showed that 60%
of red haired men like the taste of coffee, whereas 66% of
brown-haired men do. Now, although this 6% difference is
significant (and, in this example, pretty weird!) its still only
a difference in degree. However, its likely that it would be
reported in the media as: "Brown haired men like coffee but
red-heads don't". And for years later people would vaguely
remembered hearing about it and say things like "Oh, you have
red hair, you can't like coffee then!" A
small, 6% difference gets turned into an absolute,
black-and-white conclusion: all brown haired men like coffee,
all red haired men hate it. Similarly, the 'take home' message
of this report for most people will probably be that "A man's
earning power is no longer of any importance to women and all
they want in a man is good looks." Which, if you think about it,
is far, far from what the study actually can show.
Secondly, as reported, it appears
that the study merely asked the women to rate
their preferences. It didn't study what their actual preferences
where, what they really chose in a man. They merely asked them.
So, again, we should modify the reporting of the findings to be:
"Higher earning women now claim to rate attractiveness as
more important than looks in a man'. But who says that what
people claim is the same as what they actually DO? The two
things are demonstrably different and often only loosely
connected. People have a strong tendency to give answers which
are 'socially acceptable'. Therefore its not surprising that
higher earning women would claim to rate wealth as less
important. Not only does the media constantly push the idea of
'empowered women' who no longer need any economic dependence on
a personal relationship with a man (although they certainly need
the male tax-payer, and in many cases the ex-husband paying them
alimony), but also these women might not want to appear greedy
if they are already high-earners and they want a
high earning husband. My guess would be that the later is
actually closer to the truth: high earning women probably seek
high earning, or even higher earning men. Even when you look at
marriages in which the woman earns more, you often find that it
wasn't so when they first met, and its only since their marriage
that the women's salary has exceeded the man's. If this is
the case, and person observations as well as common sense would
suggest that it is, then reports like this one are quite
harmfully misleading. For example, if it turns out that women
are actually STILL looking for a high earning man (although they
now want good looks too), yet young men are led to believe that
looks are the only thing that matter to a woman in selecting a
mate, then these men will probably become further de-motivated
into working towards a good, high earning job, and will suffer
in their chances of finding a mate. Of course, this kind of mis-leading
propaganda (hiding the importance that women place on 'power' in
a man) has been disseminated for years, and plays right into the
feminist agenda.
Lastly, there are alternative
explanations for the results other than higher earning women
'don't need' a man:
It may be that higher earning women spend
more on their looks, and are more likely to engage in plastic
surgery, therefore are more likely to want a man they rate as
equally above average attractive as themselves.
Or it may be
that this is just a consequence of society's increasing emphasis
on attractiveness and style (i.e. the cult of celebrity, and the
popularity of cosmetic surgery).
Equally, these results could
have something to do with the decreasing importance of 'class'
in society. For example, in past times women in well paying
professional careers might have tended to look for wealthy
husbands not so much for their money, but because they tended to
socialise and marry within their same class.
Or it could be that wealthier
women are more likely to actively look for a man for a 'fling'
type relationship, whereas lower earning women may tend to enter
into these casual relationships on the spur of the moment. This
hypothesis seems possible to me, as high-earning women are
probably more prone to planning their lives. And because such
casual relationships are only for short term pleasure, this
means that they are more likely to look for good-looks in a man
in these cases.
Or it could be that wealthier
women are far more likely than poor women to have their choice
of dates with high earning men, and hence become more complacent
about riches in a man and value them less, while the opposite is
true for poorer women.
It may also be that higher
earning men are also less likely than poorer men to rate
'earning power' as important in a mate, and that richer women
throughout history have always valued the wealth of a man as
less important than not-so-rich women. In which case this study
isn't as novel as it might first appear.
'Fishing' is too white, and
too male:
The British government is spending $33 million for a 10-year
campaign to attract more minorities and women to fishing.
I was wondering what they spent
my taxes on.
Film:
Sean
Connery might come out of retirement for another Indiana Jones
film
Branson's
'Virgin Galactic'
is already starting 'tourist' flights into space in 2008.
Women spend £182,000 on makeup in a lifetime
That is around $300,000. The
study also shows that women spend almost an hour a day on their
makeup and hair.
Wednesday 5th April
Funny Video:
American
schoolgirls willingly sign petition to 'end women's suffrage'
Mother defends the 'boys are stupid' T-shirts:
I do want to be able to explain to a 9-year-old boy in terms he
will understand why I think it's OK for girls to wear shirts
that revel in their superiority over boys.
Ah yes, women are so
caring that even mothers will trash their own little son in the
newspaper.
Here is another
puke-inducing (and pointless) article by the same woman:
Gender divide is a real pain.
Here is her email address:
tshapiro@honoluluadvertiser.com
And here is Chris Key's response
End of the cult of
celebrity?:
Swiss
watch maker Omega has decided to make a vital shift in its
advertising by experimenting with brand ambassadors that are not
famous faces but pack in a message
Monday 3rd April
also see:
Dr Helen's post on it, and the comments therein.
Historically people tended to
live in extended family units. This solved a lot of problems -
such as care of the elderly - and helped conserve energy and
shared out work. It also kept loneliness at bay for many.
But now the social contract that held men
into certain constraining responsibilities has not only been
broken by women but men are now actively punished for upholding
those historic responsibilities. For example, women react with
great hostility to ANY suggestion that they should temper their
behaviour or follow a moral code ("Don't JUDGE me!" they cry),
yet they are very keen that men should still follow a
strict path of behaviour. The same women who want total licence
for themselves will suddenly declare that they are 'old
fashioned' when it comes to what they expect from a man!
Yet the
politically correct would rather blame the effects of the feminist era
on passing comets than take a look at the truth.
I mean, what planet are you people living on? Do you still
think that its possible for a typical working man to support a wife,
large family and large house like he could in the 1950s? Get real.
Video of two women trying to fight
one man. And the man wins
You have to register to see the
video, but its worth it (just pop in an old email address that
you don't use). In this age of Laura Crofts and women and girls
on TV and in films always able to beat up crowds of men, its
amazingly shocking to be reminded of the obvious truth: most of
the time a man will easily be able to win against a woman in a
no-holds-barred fight. The only exception is when the man feels
constrained by some chivalrous reason not to hit back.
Historical treatment of
boys:
Castrati were the singing superstars of the 18th Century. But,
as a new exhibition illustrates, theirs is a tale with some
modern parallels.
I'm disappointed in seeing the
usually excellent Dr David Starkey with a grin on his face
displaying this instrument. Also note the 'comical' title and
tone of the article. The BBC would never take this approach with
a similar article about girls. In fact it would claim it was
more evidence of how girls have been oppressed throughout
history. Remember, when men or boys are hurt at home its
'comedy', when women are hurt it is 'domestic violence'. When
reporting historical pain, death or torture of men or boys, the
media tend to - at best - hide the sex of the victims, or to
make light of it.
Similarly, when the British and
American soldiers in Iraq recently bravely rescued two Canadian
and one British peace activist who had been kidnapped and were
facing being beheaded, the media and the Christian organisation
that they were part of
said that they were 'released'. Not rescued, 'released'.
Effects of the 'abuse industry':
'I lost my job because I
was a man playing with children'
Another man-bashing
website:
Make him
pay
Forthcoming book:
The Polygamous Sex
Men told: it could be rape if a
woman is too drunk to say no
And:
Feminism:
The plight of the female in this great nation is not
discrimination by men. It is the militant feminists who have launched an
all out assault on femininity making it near impossible to embrace the
fact that you are a female.
A study of the
decline of Western civilisation
It seems that most marriage
counselling doesn't work, and the principles that such
counsellors use are basically just made up. It wouldn't surprise
me if such therapists are heavily influenced by feminist and
politically correct dogma. So if you are in a marriage and its
in trouble and you want to save it, wouldn't it be better to use
principles based on genuine, robust research?
Also see:
Divorce
Statistics Collection
Wednesday 29th March
Rosie Boycott says financial prosperity has made women
materialistic
Effects of feminism:
Feminist
zealots create an anti-male world
'Basic Instinct 2' flops:
Whatever happened to the erotic thriller?
India:
"Loyal" donkeys better than wives, says textbook
What's Happening to Boys? Young Women These Days Are Driven -- but
Guys Lack Direction
The folly of all this is the idea that it will all be solved by some
silly little 'social program'. Typical liberal BS: mess up society so
that people can't function properly then dole them back their power in
little bits... just as long as they act like good little boys.
The most sickening thing is that these are the same
people who stay stony silent when its revealed that there is an epidemic
of suicide amongst young men. Yet as soon as they hear that young men
aren't working and consuming enough they throw a tantrum. The
baby-boomers and feminists will truly be looked back upon by future
generations as the most amoral, greedy bunch of scum-bags of the
millennium.
When you feminise education, take away competition from schools, use
'positive discrimination' to discriminate against white men in the
workplace, over-tax us, then make us vulnerable to loosing vast swathes
of our life savings/home in divorce do you seriously think young men
will be as eager as ever to rush out and get married and get a mortgage
at age 21?
One minute we're told that we are oppressive patriarchs who try to
entrap women into the slavery of marriage, and who do nothing but
destroy the environment with our 'progress'. The next minute we're told
that we are losers for not marrying and that we aren't consuming
enough! This kind of 'denigrate the person WHATEVER they do' behaviour is
the sort of thing that a sociopath or abusive personality inflicts upon
others.
What is really driving this whine-fest against young men are two things:
1. Older, traditional men being jealous that today's young men are not entrapped by
the same social responsibilities as past generations. And women getting
bitter that men aren't rushing to support them to stay at home so they
can give up work.
and:
2. The fear that the engine of the economy - today's young men - is no
longer going to work harder and harder and for longer hours, which is
necessary to fund the retirements of an aging population, and to fund a
generation of women who've decided that the workplace isn't the utopia
they thought it was, and, if-you-please, can we give up work now and
'retire' to being moms... on your paycheck?
Sorry sister but that era is over. And it was you baby boomers and
feminists who killed it. So don't blame us for the effects. The social
contracts that held men into being society's workhorses were broken by
you long ago, so don't you dare whine at us for not living up to YOUR
expectations. Which are actually nothing more than greed-driven shaming
tactics. Exactly the same tactics that women and older men have for
centuries used to get ordinary men to go off and fight in wars.
Take a running jump, cos this generation of men doesn't care what you
think anymore.
Feminism:
Fatherless boys and foolish feminists
Feminism:
Decline and fall of the caring woman
Men:
Harvard professor Harvey Mansfield has written a book on manliness
News and links
Archive: 2006:
2005:
May
/
June
/
July
/
August &
September
2004:
|
Latest News Headline
The best of:
I'd watch out if I was a Western woman
Stephen Baskerville
|