Against Claritus

Greetings!

I recently read a blog post entitled What Is It All About by Claritus, which is located here.

My first impression was that this woman was like a blind man wandering about on the beaches of Normandy on D-Day. Clearly, she has no real understanding of either feminism OR the Men's Rights Movement.

As is the case with most feminists and their sympathizers, she writes about her "feelings", and supplies her reader with little in the way of FACTS.

Unfortunately for our writer, feelings can only get you so far. If she desires to be taken seriously among the intellectual giants within the Men's Rights Movement, she is going to have to supply some serious data in order to back up her assertions.

Let's take a closer look at what she wrote:

Men’s Rights Activists. Started up in response to the third wave of feminism that has washed across the western world. Started up with good intentions, but now degenerated into angry men calling women names.

“Is this true? No.

Most men writing under the standard of MRA are making legitimate points, about
how the way child custody is handled is unfair, about how the education system
is designed for girls to excel rather than boys. However, the way they throw
about the words ‘bitch’ and ‘whore’ doesn’t just distress me: it makes my blood boil.”

Our author is a little sensitive because "women" are being "disrespected". However the fact is, women have been disrespecting themselves for quite a while now. Furthermore, while I can understand her feelings on this issue, the facts are that men have been systematically demonized for decades. Please see my post on Misandry in the public square here. In addition, our author should understand that Men have held their tongues for over forty years, while feminists and their Leftist allies destroyed our most ancient and vital right [a][aa], a man's right to his own child [b].

It is important to remember that anger is NOT a bad thing, feminist brainwashing to the contrary. Righteous anger, when injustice is being visited upon you, is a blessing, not a curse. So if men are angry, and call women bitches and whores (and from my experience, these labels are heartily justified in most cases), then it is because most of today's modern women are:

Unpleasant, insolent, disrespectful, untrustworthy, selfish, bitter, petty, cunning, unfaithful, loose in morals, promiscuous, and whorish.

The proof is this is overwhelming. All one has to do is to visit sites such as Eternal Bachelor, Captain Zarmand, Don’t Marry, among others, to find well DOCUMENTED accounts of women behaving badly. In short, MRAs are calling it as we see it, and if women such as Claritus can't stand the heat, then she needs to get the HELL out of the kitchen.

Leave the discussion of serious issues to the grown folks; those who can't handle the truth can go back to their feminist friends who, in their insane denial of the truth, will weave tales of unmatched Sophistry in order to make sure that blood doesn't get boiled.

Claritus continues:

“Even the dreaded feminists can manage to write a post on equality without having to resort to calling men names! I read once that ‘women should not call men dogs or bastards’. I fully agree. Women shouldn't’t call men names. BUT men should be able to write a sentence without referring to the entire female population as prostitutes!”

Our author has much to learn about the art of debate. She claims that feminists write posts on equality without resorting to name calling. This is an ignorant statement for two reasons. Firstly, she has provided no links or no proof that her quote ‘women should not call men dogs or bastards’ was actually made. Secondly, there are ample feminist writings that compare Men to animals, rapists, and other unsavory things.

According to Men’s Wiki:

"The male is a domestic animal which, if treated with firmness...can be trained to do most things." -- Jilly Cooper, SCUM (Society For Cutting Up Men, started by Valerie Solanas)

"If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." --Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001.

"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." -- Andrea Dworkin

"Men are rapists, batterers, plunderers, killers; these same men are religious prophets, poets, heroes, figures of romance, adventure, accomplishment, figures ennobled by tragedy and defeat. Men have claimed the earth, called it 'Her'. Men ruin Her. Men have airplanes, guns, bombs, poisonous gases, weapons so perverse and deadly that they defy any authentically human imagination." -- Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women

My feelings about men are the result of my experience. I have little sympathy for them. Like a Jew just released from Dachau, I watch the handsome young Nazi soldier fall writhing to the ground with a bullet in his stomach and I look briefly and walk on. I don't even need to shrug. I simply don't care. What he was, as a person, I mean, what his shames and yearnings were, simply don't matter." -- Marilyn French; The Woman's Room

"All men are rapists and that's all they are" -- Marilyn French, Authoress; (later, advisoress to Al Gore's Presidential Campaign.)

"And let's put one lie to rest for all time: the lie that men are oppressed, too, by sexism--the lie that there can be such a thing as 'men's liberation groups.' Oppression is something that one group of people commits against another group, specifically because of a 'threatening' characteristic shared by the latter group--skin, color, sex or age, etc. The oppressors are indeed FUCKED UP by being masters, but those masters are not OPPRESSED. Any master has the alternative of divesting himself of sexism or racism--the oppressed have no alternative--for they have no power but to fight. In the long run, Women's Liberation will of course free men--but in the short run it's going to cost men a lot of privilege, which no one gives up willingly or easily. Sexism is NOT the fault of women--kill your fathers, not your mothers". -- Robin Morgan

I would like to make this clear; these are not quotes by some ‘anonymous’ feminist poster on some obscure feminist weblog. These are DOCUMENTED quotes by some of the most famous feminists in history.

Again, it would appear that Claritus is very unknowledgeable about the philosophy of her beloved feminist movement. Perhaps it would be better for her to come to this humble blog and let a MAN and a MRA educate her as to what feminism is really about, before she writes foolishly about the Men’s Rights Movement in general, and MRAs in particular.

The author notes:

“…In the MGTOW manifesto it says they want women to return to their traditional roles of complementing men - but for the love of everything green don’t assume that that means MRAs want men to return to their traditional roles! They want women to stop having sex all the time (to the point of inserting chips into their arms so that men can tell if they want sex or not), just for the pleasure of it, (like the feminists have encouraged women to do) but they still defend the old line of ‘men are genetically hardwired to spread their seed’ meaning, basically, that men should get carte blanche to have sex with as many women as possible.”

It should be said that every MRA has his (and her, as there are female MRAs out there) own opinion as to what the role of women should be. I will state my position on this subject, and others are free to agree or disagree as they like.

I am a Classical Liberal. I believe that every human being has basic, unalienable rights, given to them by the Holy One (Blessed be He).

I don’t particularly care if women work, or if women stay at home. Nor do I care about who "wears the pants" in the family. I think that those choices should be the private (not the politically correct) decision of each individual couple. It is up to each person to negotiate for themselves the duties and roles that they so desire in their relationships. And once the couple has solemnized their decision via the marriage contract [**], then let it be done forever.

In this "marketplace of love" as I call it, it is my opinion that in the aggregate, most men will naturally choose to be the leaders of their homes and families, as it is their nature to lead [*], although there are exceptions to this rule.

The beauty of Liberalism (not to be confused with today’s Leftist bent) is that there is a division between the Public and the Private, and that the citizenry and the government both have their respective rights, responsibilities, powers and obligations. Feminism, on the other hand, seeks to destroy that balance [c]. It demonizes not just men, but also traditionally minded women (like my wife for example) who choose to emphasize family over career, and the home over the public square.

Every person has innate inclinations [d]. Some want to work, others not. Some want to marry, others not. I really don’t mind what an individual person does, so long as the personal idea of freedom is equally balanced with the freedoms of others, so that the needs of society are balanced with the freedom of the individual, so long as the innocent are protected and the guilty punished, and that reasonable persons can enter into oaths, covenants, and contracts, free from duress and coercion, and abide by the oaths they have spoken.

Leftist feminism, on the other hand, seeks to manipulate in order to gain power, uses the State to enforce its aims [e], and denies Men and women both the freedom to choose what is just and good, in addition to absolving women of any form of maturity or moral responsibility [f].

It is interesting that our author should mention the spreading of seed. I personally support Polygamy [g], for religious and logical reasons. By our very nature, men and women are different, in very profound [***] ways.

In matters of sex, Dr. Louann Brizendine, M.D., author of the Impressive work The Female Brain, tells us that:

The Great Sexual Divide

“The sex related centers in the male brain are actually about two times larger than parallel structures in the female brain. When it comes to the brain, size does make a difference in the way women and men think about, respond to, and experience sex. Men, quite literally, have sex on their minds more than women do. They feel pressure in their gonads and prostates unless they ejaculate frequently. Males have double the brain space and processing power devoted to sex as females. Just as women have an eight-lane superhighway for processing emotion while men have a small country road, men have O’Hare Airport as a hub for processing thoughts about sex whereas women have the airfield nearby that lands small and private planes. That probably explains why 85 percent of twenty to thirty year old males think about sex every fifty two seconds and women think about it once a day--- or up to three or four times on their most fertile days. That makes for interesting interactions between the sexes. Guys often have to talk women into having sex. It’s usually not the first thing on women’s minds(Brizendine, p.91.).

Continuing on with the idea that women are less sexual than men, consider this piece by the BBC:

“Security 'bad news for sex drive'

Differences in sexual appetite may be driven by evolution.

A woman's sex drive begins to plummet once she is in a secure relationship, according to research. Researchers from Germany found that four years into a relationship, less than half of 30-year-old women wanted regular sex. Conversely, the team found a man's libido remained the same regardless of how long he had been in a relationship.

Writing in the journal Human Nature, the scientists said the differences resulted from how humans had evolved. The researchers from Hamburg-Eppendorf University Hospital interviewed 530 men and women about their relationships.

They found 60% of 30-year-old women wanted sex "often" at the beginning of a relationship, but within four years of the relationship this figure fell to under 50%, and after 20 years it dropped to about 20%.

In contrast, they found the proportion of men wanting regular sex remained at between 60-80%, regardless of how long they had been in a relationship.

Tenderness

The study also revealed tenderness was important for women in a relationship.
About 90% of women wanted tenderness, regardless of how long they had been in a relationship, but only 25% of men who had been in a relationship for 10 years said they were still seeking tenderness from their partner. Dr Dietrich Klusmann, lead author of the study and a psychologist from Hamburg-Eppendorf University Hospital, believed the differences were down to human evolution.

He said: "For men, a good reason their sexual motivation to remain constant would be to guard against being cuckolded by another male."But women, he said, have evolved to have a high sex drive when they are initially in a relationship in order to form a "pair bond" with their partner. But, once this bond is sealed a woman's sexual appetite declines, he added…”

So the old idea that Men give love to get sex, and women give sex to get love, seems to be validated by modern research. It is ironic, however, that science is just now proving what the Ancients already knew. And while each individual man and woman is unique, this 'sexual divide' holds true across the aggregate.

And so, in response to Claritus’s attempt to label our healthy male sex drives a “double standard”, I boldly state that there is nothing two-faced about it. We were created this way, and Man is NOT a monogamous creature by nature.

And while it is necessary to place limitations on innate behavior for the sake of society, I think that the burden placed on men is too great, and the yoke on women, far too light in our post feminist age. Women should be married to one man for the sake of stability and accountability, and a man, if he is able, should be allowed to build a polygamous household. But I digress.

Human nature is like a river. You can deny the rushing waters, but the river always finds a way to channel its natural flow. Sometimes dammed rivers lead to destructive floods. Such is the case with men, love and sex in our time.

All in all, this is another example of our author's great fallacy:

Writing from her “feelings”, instead of dealing in facts.

While our author goes on to address other issues in her post, my analysis stops here, as I have proved my point:

Claritus is ill-informed about a great many things, and poses no threat in the slightest to our movement.

Furthermore, she is a writer that is not to be taken seriously by MRAs, as her weak arguments are easily countered by the spotlight of Truth. In addition, her endorsement of the doctrines of a KNOWN hate movement that has crippled Men, women and society makes her guilty by association.

A friend of feminists is no friend of mine. I can only hope, for her own sake, that she disassociates herself from such a notorious group of man haters.

If she renounces her feminist ties, and demonstrates that she has done serious and scholarly research, I for one, might reconsider my stance. In the meantime, I will chalk her up with the ever decreasing group of amateur feminist apologists.

Kumogakure.