Forecasting the End of Feminism

What's good?

Hope you all had a great Thanksgiving holiday!

Most readers know that I am optimistic about the future of Men's rights, and I believe that Political Feminism will be put out of its misery in the near future.

So let's talk about why I think the femmes are doomed.

Let's go!!



Radar: First they ignore you.



Not too long ago, a valued reader asked me why I was so optimistic about the future of Men's Rights. How could I be so confident, he wondered, that the power of political feminism is beginning to wane?

Firstly, I want to make it clear that political feminists still have a lot of clout, and that terrible injustices are happening to men and boys day in and day out. That is the reality. And we shouldn't forget that change happens very slowly; political feminism will do everything it can to prolong its unnatural life. Political feminism, in other words, is still armed and extremely dangerous.

In making statements about the future of feminism, I evaluate the ideology in the same way I evaluate the future prospects of an investment. I am looking for trends; small and subtle happenings that could lead to huge manifestations at some point in the future.

I forecast the ebb and flow of political feminist dominance using a variety of tools. One method I use, because I believe that feminism is an expression of psychic forces and human will, is the law of In and Yo (more commonly known as Yin and Yang).







As I mentioned in a previous post, I belong to a certain school of knowledge that prepares one for a wide range of combat and survival scenarios. When one is engaged in a military operation, forecasting the winds of fortune becomes a valuable skill.

One method to try to determine the outcome of an engagement in advance is the art of forecasting using In and Yo.

The law of In and Yo is fairly simple. The universe is cyclical in nature. All things ebb and flow. There is a waxing and a waning cycle that applies to all things.

The stock market rises and falls. Nations rise and fall. The moon waxes and wanes. People are born and then they die.

Nothing rests indefinitely, and everything is in constant motion.

Nothing in the natural world lasts forever, and, by extension, no ideology lasts forever either.

This is a simplified explanation of the law of In and Yo. With this knowledge, one can look for signs and cues and determine where we are at in any particular cycle, and one can also look for clues for expansion or contraction.

If one determines that feminism is in its ascending phase, then it is wise to get out of the way unless one wants to be crushed underfoot.

If one determines that feminism is entering into its descending phase, then one can help the process along by intense criticism and activism. In other words, we as Men's Rights Activists can help hasten its fall as the inescapable force of gravity takes hold of our favorite hate movement.

I believe there is enough evidence out there to suggest that political feminism is in decline.

One must also remember the 80/20 rule: 80 percent of outputs are caused by 20 percent of inputs. As Mr. Koch explains here, small, seemingly random events, such as, for example, a man in the UK writing a blog post critical of political feminism, could cause massive waves. Add a court decision here, a breakthrough study there, an economic crisis on top of that, and all of a sudden, the ship of political feminism could face the perfect storm that could potentially tear the vessel apart and run it aground.

There are Universal Laws that can be observed and applied to real life events and situations. If one is looking for clues as to the future trends affecting an event, a nation, or an ideology, one can determine whether or not it is waxing or waning. One can also determine if it is wise to confront the ideology directly, or attack it subtly. Sometimes it is better to keep oneself out of harms way, and other times, bold and direct opposition is the best course of action.

It should also be pointed out that movements and ideologies that violate Universal Laws will not long survive, as they go against the Universal grain. It takes massive amounts of energy and capital to overcome resistance and advance the unnatural social organization that political feminist public policy demands, and I believe it is beginning to run out of steam as various forms of drag begin to take hold. As more men (and women) free themselves from the Fematrix, the political, economic, and social will to continue on with our Matriarchal public policy will dissolve along with it.

And, as a wee bit of evidence to support my ramblings, allow me to share this recent Radar alert:

"First they ignore you, ..."

Two weeks ago, Slate.com's short-lived1 publication "Double X" published an article by Kathryn Joyce entitled "'Men's Rights' Groups Have Become Frighteningly Effective."2

This was not Slate.com's finest hour. One thing this article could never be accused of is objective reporting.

On Nov. 5th, the very same day the Double X article appeared, Salon.com's Broadsheet published an article by Judy Berman entitled "'Men's rights' groups go mainstream"3 that adds no new information, and simply seems to be an effort to repeat the Double X article to Salon's readers...

... Mahatma Gandhi is reputed to have said: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." The joint Slate/Salon attack pieces are a good indication that we're well past stage 1.

Congratulation to all RADAR supporters and allies for getting us this far. Let's keep it up!

Respect to RADAR, Glen Sacks, and countless other MRAs who are on the front lines in the battle against Political Feminism.

Let's take a moment to look at the Double X article:

"Men's Rights" Groups Have Become Frighteningly Effective

They’re changing custody rights and domestic violence laws.

By: Kathryn Joyce

At the end of October, National Domestic Violence Awareness Month, members of the men’s movement group RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting [2]) gathered on the steps of Congress to lobby against what they say are the suppressed truths about domestic violence: that false allegations are rampant, that a feminist-run court system fraudulently separates innocent fathers from children, that battered women’s shelters are running a racket that funnels federal dollars to feminists, that domestic-violence laws give cover to cagey mail-order brides seeking Green Cards, and finally, that men are victims of an unrecognized epidemic of violence at the hands of abusive wives.

“It’s now reached the point,” reads a statement from RADAR, “that domestic violence laws represent the largest roll-back in Americans’ civil rights since the Jim Crow era!”

RADAR’s rhetoric may seem overblown, but lately the group and its many partners have been racking up very real accomplishments. In 2008, the organization claimed to have blocked passage of four federal domestic-violence bills, among them an expansion of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) to international scope and a grant to support lawyers in pro bono domestic-violence work. Members of this coalition have gotten themselves onto drafting committees for VAWA’s 2011 reauthorization. Local groups in West Virginia and California have also had important successes, criminalizing false claims of domestic violence in custody cases, and winning rulings that women-only shelters are discriminatory.

Ahh yes. You can feel the fear. The political feminists are worried, and for good reason. Their deceitful, harmful, and hurtful movement is going to be dumped like so much trash, and THEY KNOW IT.

The times, they are a changin'. And, in this next paragraph from Double X, we have a prime example of why feminism is toast... their entire movement is based upon lies, falsehoods, and propaganda:

... In this, critics like Australian sociologist Michael Flood say that men’s rights movements reflect the tactics of domestic abusers themselves, minimizing existing violence, calling it mutual, and discrediting victims. MRA groups downplay national abuse rates, just as abusers downplay their personal battery; they wage campaigns dismissing most allegations as false, as abusers claim partners are lying about being hit; and they depict the violence as mutual—part of an epidemic of wife-on-husband abuse—as individual batterers rationalize their behavior by saying that the violence was reciprocal. Additionally, MRA groups’ predictions of future violence by fed-up men wronged by the family-law system seem an obvious additional correlation, with the threat of violence seemingly intended to intimidate a community, like a fearful spouse, into compliance...

Good ol Michael Flood.

It turns out that I have already debunked his entire line of reasoning, and exposed his thesis as fundamentally flawed [a][b][c][d]. As usual, feminist rhetoric is trumped by correct reasoning and irrefutable evidence.

In any event... political feminism is a dead hag walking. It simply cannot stand up to any objective scrutiny, and its only a matter of time before it collapses upon itself like a ton of bricks. And believe you me... the feminists know this to be true.



Conclusion


The art of forecasting is an inexact science. My timing could be wrong, or something might happen to totally alter my prediction.

However, I see that the trends are lining up to sink the ship of political feminism. And, as they say in the world of finance, "the trend is your friend... until it ends."

So, until further notice, I will continue to assert that the best days of political feminism are behind it. Going forward, they are going to face ever mounting scrutiny and analysis.

Unfortunately for political feminism... an ideology based on deception and lies simply cannot take the heat. And I believe the day is coming when feminist public policy will be overthrown.

I, for one, can't wait for that day.

Gyokko.