Who Should We Focus On?

by W.F. Price on April 5, 2012

Where engaging feminists (the real ones) is concerned, I think we have to recognize that we aren’t going to make much progress, and that doesn’t really matter. If the really passionate ones on certain sites are any indication, for the most part they are a collection of sexual deviants, the mentally ill and pornographers. The last one may come as a surprise to some, but it’s actually quite typical; prostitutes tend to gravitate toward feminism.

However, there are people worth engaging: those who may not be entirely on the same page as us but who also don’t like the status quo much themselves. As commenter greyghost points out, Dalrock is doing a great job of engaging Christian social conservatives on the issue, and although he’s finding a lot of resistance, it’s undeniable that scripture is definitely not on the side of the feminists.

Not long ago, social conservatives were pretty much hopeless. They are very slow learners (conservatism and stubbornness go hand in hand), so for the last twenty years or so they’ve been going back to the default chivalry position, and it’s failed over and over. But this doesn’t mean that they will never change. Because conservatives are becoming a larger and larger share of native born Americans with every year liberal women delay family and abort their children, ignoring them would be unwise, and if out-of-control feminism is to ever be done away with, they will be the demographic we’ll have to count on to do the job. Fortunately, the sons of these more conservative Americans, although they may be as innocent and naive as any men while still young, are seeing an entirely new side of women. As I’ve pointed out, things have changed a lot on the last 20 years, and the pretensions of sweet feminine innocence are believed only by the most socially insulated old dinosaurs out there. As for the sons of the liberals, I think we’re going to find that a whole lot of them are already squarely in our camp. Growing up male in a feminist environment can do one of two things: either it can break a man’s soul and turn him into a lifelong self-hating mangina, or it will forever instill a strong disgust for feminism and all its associated horrors. I’m afraid those who suffered the former fate are lost to us, but for the latter, I suspect they are the most vocal younger pro-male voices out there.

This is why focusing effort on the conservatives is a good idea. Those of us who grew up in a more liberal environment have already made up our minds by maturity (I include myself in that group), and our attitude toward feminism isn’t going to change. Conservatives, while vaguely hostile to feminism, still have an incomplete understanding of it, and need to be guided to a clearer understanding of concepts such as female hypergamy. You’d think their own holy books, which offer plenty of examples of hypergamy, false rape accusations, female misbehavior, etc., would do the trick, but unfortunately they tend to overlook those parts. Perhaps a few gentle reminders might help. Or, if necessary, a heavy dose of shaming right back at them.

So, I’m going to endorse Dalrock’s approach, as I think it’s one that has some of the best potential. Dalrock takes the very issues social conservatives are preaching to the rest of us about and holds a mirror up to their faces to show them the beam in their eye. I can’t think of anything more effective, or ultimately more compassionate, as their own sons and daughters will inherit the world in due course, and if they want them to live the lives they see as virtuous and Godly, a dose of reality about female nature is sorely needed.

{ 57 comments… read them below or add one }

woggy April 5, 2012 at 14:54

“Conservatives, while vaguely hostile to feminism, still have an incomplete understanding of it, and need to be guided to a clearer understanding of concepts such as female hypergamy. You’d think their own holy books, which offer plenty of examples of hypergamy, false rape accusations, female misbehavior, etc., would do the trick, but unfortunately they tend to overlook those parts. Perhaps a few gentle reminders might help. Or, if necessary, a heavy dose of shaming right back at them. ”

Conservatives and their Holy Book (s)….

Speaking specifically of the Bible, most Christian conservatives are deathly afraid to call a spade a spade where female’s deviant and manipulative behaviour is recorded.

Unless one has spent much time within the walls of a Protestant church, the reason for that might not be so obvious, but it’s simply this:
Congregational government, with women having full voting rights.

Around 1900, it became increasingly common for clergymen to be hirelings of the various churches, where the congregation can vote to fire him – in Christian love, of course – not only putting him out of a livelihood, but also out of a place to live and excluded from his natural social circle.

Think you’ll reliably hear what really NEEDS to be heard, on any subject?
Not likely, and since men have become increasingly disgusted with the pious misandry being regurgitated on a weekly basis, they’ve decided that washing their cars on Sunday morning is a more worthwhile pursuit – and who could blame them?

Of course, this leaves women with a voting majority. I need say no more.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 0
Professor Mentu April 5, 2012 at 15:08

DalRock is always a good bet. I think public enemy #1 is the beta male, because without them, feminists could not exist. Betas provide hamster food in a manner most foul. By exposing the church’s beta underbelly, DalRock is is doing the Lord’s work.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 5
Pugs Fugly April 5, 2012 at 15:10

Dalrock is amazing. This article was both my introduction to the MRM and the first of many eye-openers.

http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/the-whispers/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Atlas April 5, 2012 at 15:13

Another issue is where the modern “conservative” church is incorporated. This puts them under government control, specifically through the Johnson Amendment. So, another thing we must be willing to do is to ask our churches to un-incorporate so that the pastors and clergymen can speak about any topic including feminism, hypergamy, divorce, and abortion. They also can point out current-day examples such as politicians and call those men and women to account.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
NWOslave April 5, 2012 at 15:13

Most of the sermons by conservative religeous denominations focus on mens failings or how men can do more for their families. Women are never given an earful of their failings.

Liberal denominations are more of the same except for the added perk of praising women for existing as women. Your standard female minister is dressed in colorful skirts, blouses, jewelry and perfumed. Which makes it pratically sacrilege to teach anything pertaining to humility, vanity, loyalty or modesty.

And of course you have the “feminine spirituality” movement. The apparent next wave of feminism. It seems the old God is a bit to patriarchal for the ladies taste in the modern world. They instead prefer to worship the goddess within all women. So much more convenient to worship oneself. When you are a goddess yourself you can never be wrong.

Conservative, liberal or female self worship. Men are leaving in droves, and it’s no mystery as to why they’re leaving.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 1
DivorcedDad April 5, 2012 at 15:16

I am all about reaching out to conservatives and other not-yet-awake men, guys who have not yet even heard of the red pill. Indeed, we have a moral imperative to reach out and wise them up – or at least try – before they collide with feminized, post-modern American reality the hard way. Most won’t but that doesn’t mean we must not try.

We need to understand that “conservatives” are basically pining for, and idolizing, a society and a culture that no longer exist. The patriarchal (ie historically normal) society of America, and the whole West, that thrived as late as the Mad Men era is gone, long and irrevocably gone.

Pretending that that world – it’s close to us, still in living memory for some, but might as well be the Ice Age – makes no more sense than being Sancho Panza and fantasizing, on horseback, that the Middle Ages are still with us.

The White Knights are just a few decades behind the times, but they might as well be pining for the return of Richard the Lionhearted. When “conservatives” realize this – in my experience they tend to wake up when in Family Court and not before – they suddenly observe that there is nothing left to “conserve,” and there hasn’t been for decades.

“Conservatives” are pathetic but they’re not the enemy (unlike, say men who consider themselves “progressives” ie willfully in the enemy camp). Wake up just one of them, who knows how many lives you might save?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 2
Uncle Elmer April 5, 2012 at 15:23

Speaking of “conservatives”, William J. Bennett’s back with a compelling new essay that rips the lid off the “hook-up culture” !

“In the act of degrading women, men are also degrading themselves…”

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/04/opinion/bennett-modern-women/index.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Rob April 5, 2012 at 15:44

I’ve had extremely positive results reaching out to Catholics in the past.

Remember, 6 years ago, when Amanda Marcotte start that big kurfuffle, and got into the national spotlight for these comments?

“Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.” — Amanda Marcotte (Former Blogmaster for John Edwards’ 2008 Presidential Campaign) Pandagon goes undercover the lazy way on a Catholic anti-contraception seminar, Pt. II. Pandagon. Retrieved on 2006-06-14.
.
“the Catholic church is not about to let something like compassion for girls get in the way of using the state as an instrument to force women to bear more tithing Catholics.” — Amanda Marcotte (Former Blogmaster for John Edwards’ 2008 Presidential Campaign) (2006-12-26). Some reproductive rights links to consider while digesting Christmas leftovers. Pandagon. Retrieved on 2006-12-26.

Well, this was before the dam had even broken a bit on people speaking out against feminists, but, she pissed off the Catholics so much by saying this, plus O’reilly was attacking her on TV, it was very hard for her to hypocritically ban anyone she didn’t like from her blog. So, being the arse that I am, I took advantage by streaking through Pandagone with my underwear on my head going “la la la la la” in my usual way.

I’ve Got a House! (In Fembot Bingo)

Finally Banned from Pandagone

After that, I had an enormous amount of traffic from Catholics. Lol, so much so that I quit swearing on my blog. Lots of women linked to me too, on blogs completely unrelated. One lady had some flippin’ sewing and crafts blog that had a few of my articles linked directly – with a warning that the author is rather brash and is not afraid to speak his mind, lol.

After that, many Canadian Catholics started linking to me, when they seen I was anti-abortion – and that led to lots of people from “The Blogging Tories” (a big Canadian political blogging association) getting exposed to me. I used to recieve quite a bit of e-mails from Catholics asking me to post news about abortion, and quite a few of them used to regularly feed me info via e-mail.

Heh, I got to know one woman quite well via e-mail, and we discussed my methods. “Besides,” I told her, “I think God will forgive me a few cuss words.” and she agreed. She used to send me info on the effects of TV etc. etc. and also had a degree in French Literature, and helped me to understand some things about the times of the French Revolution.

At Dr. Helen’s, there was a large group of religious-conservative people posting there too for a while, and they were more than agreeable to many of the things I pointed out.

For a year or two there, it was like, “Cripes! I’ve become a bloody minister!”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 0
Annonymous April 5, 2012 at 15:47

But do we presuppose that there’s a better way sophisticated economic and military superpowers may operate other than by way of institutional misanthropy ? One that conservatives may know of and apply for our benefit and emancipation.

Maybe there isn’t any other such alternative way to maintain first rate societies, other than by using people as cheap resources. Meaning that the only political change at all possible, would be the gradual inclusion of females unto the underclass to be used, just as males are today used for cheap and easy value extraction.

Indeed, females may be presently being used already, just as harshly and as cheaply as we males are now being used. But because females are bribed with illusory powers over us, they and ourselves falsely think this system serves them well, when it really doesn’t.

What choices would conservative generations of the future have, that are not now existant to present conservatives ?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
James April 5, 2012 at 15:51

” Or, if necessary, a heavy dose of shaming right back at them.”

THat is mostly what is required. Most western men are so dumb that they will defend these vicious psychopathic western women, and so we should spew the exact same shaming language back at them. LOGIC will not work, as these men and women are not intelligent.

My Boycott American Women blog did a perfect job at this, and it reached millions.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 5
greyghost April 5, 2012 at 15:52

Rob a straight talking man is very attractive.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Geography Bee Finalist himself April 5, 2012 at 15:53

I think we should make concerted efforts to focus on driving wedges between the different groups of feminists.

Feminism is all the following:

1) contradicts itself at every turn,
2) devoid of principles,
3) intellectually lazy,
4) contributes to exploding budget deficits,
5) uses a ridiculous number of double/multiple standards,
6) always immaturely attempts to shut off debate,
7) is racist,
8) is elitist,
9) is based around idealism rather than realism
and 10) has not demonstrated any benefit for men from any walk of life because even the feminists who still harp on equality gave up that pretense long ago

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0
keyster April 5, 2012 at 15:53

I frequent Conservative sites and whenever any white-knighting or conservo-Fems show up with something, I let ‘em have it with both barrels.

One young woman wrote an article about being a Conservative Feminist, (which is a “right to life” feminist). I skewered her and a bunch of others piled on. She hasn’t mentioned it since.

(I won’t name names, but these are nationally recognized conservatives, some of whom I’ve exchanged personal emails with.)

I’ve pretty much shut down any mention of women as a special interest group at many major conservative sites. It’s easy to do because Conservatism is based on INDIVIDUAL responsibility and self-reliance. They can’t argue against it. They also recognize a distinct difference between men and women, but equal in VALUE.

It just seems whenever I barge in with MRA rhetoric, many bravely agree while others slink off in a kind of nonplussed silence. 99% of conservatives have NO IDEA about misandry, fathers rights, VAWA, Title IX, etc. and so on. But when you enlighten them, they seem to get it. It’s as if a whole other world, beyond just the “right to life” debate, opens up. Remember to them, Feminism=Abortion/Contraception and they’re never exposed to anything beyond it.

If Liberalism is the main course, feminism is the side salad.
You can’t separate the two, as much as some will go to great lengths to do so.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 5
greyghost April 5, 2012 at 16:09

Keyster
These sites you comment on. Would you say they have a large following. To really shake up the main stream.(get to really large numbers) very popular conservative types like Limbaugh,Sean Hannity, Mark Levin etc. need to be made aware of the red pill. Even limbaugh is a blue pill guy. He is like a large number of men that know something is wrong and can’t put their finger on it. I think we have a good number of guys here that can become regular commenters on non mra sites and reach many more. Red pill any and all conservatives.
I regulaly comment on yahoo articles now as greyghost with a red pill style.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
Quentin April 5, 2012 at 16:53

I am in my late 20s. I can’t speak for men of my generation, but I will speak on my behalf.

I grew up in a single mother household, was processed through an anti-male education system, and have had to deal with some of the most spoiled women to ever exist. Chivalry is becoming a thing of the past because I have had to compete with cutthroat women for employment who think they deserve preferential treatment in the hiring process. I have been treating women with indifference at an ever-increasing rate because of their nasty attitudes and unapologetic, hostile behavior towards men. There will always be men who get married, but coming from a broken family, I know what happens to men when they deal with vindictive women in divorces. I grew up on anti-male television and have heard women badmouth men on a daily basis, and I have remembered how they felt no shame in laughing at men who were victimized in some manner. If all that isn’t bad enough, I have felt invisible in this anti-male society even when I have been successful, while women are placed on pedestals for being average or just because they are women . I find myself either rebelling against this anti-male society with an in-your-face attitude or distancing myself from it through isolation. Since there are almost no men-only spaces, I don’t have many places where I can detox myself of the poisons from this anti-male society. I don’t know how many men from my generation feel this way, but I am seeing more and more men my age who are losing patience fast and have no tolerance for anything that is anti-male or anyone who gives them flak for being a man.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 0
Dalrock April 5, 2012 at 16:56

Thanks for the kind words and the linkage.

I do think it is worthwhile even though the amount of denial we are up against is truly astonishing. For a very long time men like Stanton and Driscoll, etc. have been able to spout the most rediculous nonsense one can imagine and not be called on it. I suspect they will be shocked if they see that someone other than a feminist is disagreeing with them, and even worse, that they have no logical or factual defense.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 0
Boxer April 5, 2012 at 17:04

Dear Quentin:

Since there are almost no men-only spaces, I don’t have many places where I can detox myself of the poisons from this anti-male society.

Pick out a nice (but not overly flashy) house or apartment, and move in. That is your male space, in the same way mine is my space. A few things that help me:

Don’t bother with facebook, twitter or other social networking sites, at least at home. Home is your sanctuary, and those sites are full of time-wasting nonsense.

Don’t bother with cable tee-vee. It’s the opium of the people and rarely has anything but commercial advertisements or trash. PBS/CBC can be OK, if used *very* judiciously. Occasionally they have interesting science and history programs.

You don’t need to treat your eyes and ears like a temple, but they shouldn’t be used as a sewer either; and your home should be a place where you can escape from the world.

Don’t let any of your bitches move in with you or stay more than one night. Before you know a specific girl *very* well, it’s actually best to go to hotel rooms or use her place for socializing. Even when you do know a woman well, you should not let them leave clothes or toothbrush or shit like that. Your home is yours. Women are nice in small doses (at least I think so) but we all know the risks. First they leave personal items, then they move in, and then they steal your stuff when they run off with the guitarist they met after the gig at the roadhouse. Just don’t do it.

Life is great, just make a space for you and be very selective about who you have in it (that goes for bros as well, many men are headcases too and will fill your life with nonsense) and you’ll be a lot happier.

Regards, Boxer

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 4
Flybynight April 5, 2012 at 17:43

Tough job either way. I have a liberal friend at work and he calls the sites I read “bitter man sites”. He is also a mangina and kisses his wife’s ass. I try to to get him to open his mind and read the sites but as long as his marriage “works” and the apples stay on the cart he is content. I thought liberals were suppose to be soooooo open to new ideas and alternative viewpoints…hahhahahahahhahaha.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 0
Geography Bee Finalist himself April 5, 2012 at 17:54

I thought liberals were suppose to be soooooo open to new ideas and alternative viewpoints.

Liberals are not tolerant, almost never practice what they preach (especially limousine liberals), and generally want to take away the civil liberties of any group with which they disagree. They also want to blame conservatives for societal ills when the blame rests squarely with liberals (economic inequality within a political jurisdiction is usually a result of liberal, not conservative economic policy, but liberals blame conservatives for income inequality rather than look in the mirror). Liberals are very good at making rules but unfortunately none of their rules seems to be very good.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
American April 5, 2012 at 18:14

Geography bee..”I think we should make concerted efforts to focus on driving wedges between the different groups of feminists.”
American say…There are allready huge fracture lines between the “equality feminism” of yer mothers generation, and the new “gender, Gender-Raunch feminism” that is the dominant form practiced today.
Todays feminism isn’t yer mothers feminism of 30 years ago.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 11
Anti Idiocy April 5, 2012 at 19:35

“the pretensions of sweet feminine innocence are believed only by the most socially insulated old dinosaurs”

The idea, that girls are sugar and spice and everything nice, is the most ridiculous, extreme lie ever to have been successfully foisted off onto an unsuspecting public.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
3DShooter April 5, 2012 at 19:53

@Welmer

I have to disagree with you on this one.

In some ways, your story is much like mine. Raised by a very liberal single father (and a teamster shop steward) in a very red state. In my mid to late thirties (which is where I believe you are) I went conservative much to dad’s horror.

But then I started paying attention. I saw ‘Ronnie Ray-Gun’ trading arms for hostages and Ollie North trading drugs for guns in South America. I came to view them as all lying bastards that they are. Their delusional lies were every bit on par with Clintoon’s failure to grasp the form of the verb ‘to be’.

Eventually I came to view the Liberal/Conservative issue as two sides of the same coin. Let’s face it, both parties have their fingerprints all over the misogynist laws that have plagued this country. It would be unwise to look to either as a source of strength.

Rather, I would humbly suggest you turn your efforts to those who have really brought about change – certainly in the last four years. The ones who have the conservatives scared shitless as they see this group eroding their power in this election cycle. They aren’t going to be in the seat’s of power this time around, but if their gains continue maybe next time.

I think you know who we are – You’re close, but you’re not there yet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3
3DShooter April 5, 2012 at 20:08

Just another random thought – If there is someone out there who could come up with an easily reproducible design, say a banner with an image of a teenage boy in ‘cuffs and a pregger’s teenage girl with the logo of ‘these are the faces of feminism/single motherhood’ I’d be willing to hang one from a freeway overpass. Even better if it could be distilled down to one word like – R3volution. That one’s been taken though . . .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Rebel April 5, 2012 at 20:40

There is much too much talk about Western women.
Feminism is akin to the mad cow disease. The disease has affected all women in the West.

As a result, they must all be rejected as damaged beyond repairs and left to die out on their own. I see no malice in doing that: merely self-protection.

There are still 95% of women worldwide. Enough for each Western man to find a good life mate.

Life can be so much easier this way.

All else is a waste of time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
Travis April 5, 2012 at 23:59

OT: But holy crap!
Male Birth Control: New procedure is 100 percent effective and completely reversible.
“Researchers are hopeful that the procedure will be on the market in the U.S. by 2015, with clinical trials beginning in 2012.”

Just saw this article on the Huffington Post. Apparently, the process only takes about fifteen minutes, and is effective for ten years or more. And it can be reversed at any time. The only drawback is that you’ve got to get a shot in the junk. But I would think that minor pain would be vastly preferable to the pain of having to sacrifice a good portion of your earnings in child support payments for the next twenty years…

Here’s the link.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03/male-birth-control-reversible_n_1400708.html?ref=mostpopular

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Höllenhund April 6, 2012 at 01:38

There’s only one demographic that needs to be focused on, and that’s non-feminist men, regardless of age or marital status.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
DCM April 6, 2012 at 03:24

“Geography Bee Finalist himself April 5, 2012 at 17:54

I thought liberals were suppose to be soooooo open to new ideas and alternative viewpoints.

Liberals are not tolerant, almost never practice what they preach (especially limousine liberals), and generally want to take away the civil liberties of any group with which they disagree.
………….”

Liberals are the latest incarnation of the Puritans who moved to America seeking religious freedom and a place where they could persecute other religions.
Sex obsessed, deeply interested in perversions, clinging to doctrine (theory in modern terms), constantly meddling in others’ lives to keep everyone else under control, unprincipled in their power seeking, intolerant….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Kris W April 6, 2012 at 03:40

Who should we focus on? People with power. Rich people, influential people, and powerful people.

We need to focus on the local pillars of society:
Police Officers
Teachers
Judges
Magistrates
Elected Officials
Bankers
Business Owners

Also, we need to work to create regional male voting leagues with a simple concept:

One man, One vote. A non-binding voting league open to all male registered voters. That alone will start to cause the elected politicians to become more cautious before passing another male hating law.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Kris W April 6, 2012 at 03:43

Also forgot:

Priest’s, Ministers, Rabbi(Local Spiritual Leaders).

Plus local radio talk show hosts, basically anyone who has a gathering of people they can influence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Thomas Tell-Truth April 6, 2012 at 05:35

For now, we cannot win a direct clash with the feminists. They are the established religion, and as such enjoy immense prestige, power, patronisation by the elite and billions in subsidies. But we can still lay a foundation.

1) Concentrate on the young, especially young males in thier teens and early twenties

2) Concentrate on winnable issues for now, with an eye on further gains in the future. We cannot defeat the feminists using our logic, because our logic is not accepted at this time. Feminist logic is the standard, and uprooting it will require many decades of work. We must instead concentrate on winnable issues, As these issues are promoted, our logic will seep into the public consciousness, strengthening our position.

3) Develop theory. While our logic is not yet accepted, we must still work on building theoretical foundations for the movement. Feminism succeeds because it has a comprehensive body of theory through which all public discourse is refracted. That allows feminism to colour all aspects of public and private life. We must build our own body of theory. I think the idea of Male Disposability is a good theoretical concept and we should disseminate the idea whenever possible.

4) Build a lexicon: Control of the language means you control the terms of debate. We must create a lexicon of terms. We have already begin this process.

5) Organise and agitate: Forms groups, build fact sheets and protest everything and anything. Simple as that.

6) Think local: Most decisions that affect your life are made at the level of the church, the school board and the town council. Get involved here first.

Our goal cannot be the destruction of feminism..that’s impossible. It should be the disestablishment of feminism. It can be done. Feminism was created by humans..it can be challenged by humans and its influence will be overthrown by humans. Think for the long term..this is a marathon not a sprint. We are fighting a war for position, and the enemy holds all the best ones. It be long and arduous, but to paraphrase, the power of the foe has grown, is growing and ought to be diminished.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
Migu April 6, 2012 at 06:51

http://mises.org/liberal.asp

A couple of you guys might like this.

It shows what liberalism was, and how the word was stolen to become synomoous with what people now associate with socialism.

It’s pretty interesting. Without spoiling it, I’ll just say this.

A liberal use to be the guy advocating limited government, Natural rights, and civil and economic freedom, while the conservative was trying to preserve the social order of totalitarian control, and manufactured utopia.

Food for thought. It does an excellent job of explaining how this happened.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
American April 6, 2012 at 07:21

I have even heard old school “Equality” feminists (Ariel Levy in her book about raunch culture feminism) say that modern gender/raunch style feminism is off the hook.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
MKP April 6, 2012 at 07:24

Perhaps a few gentle reminders might help. Or, if necessary, a heavy dose of shaming right back at them.

I can only hope, Mr. Price, that this was tongue-in-cheek – or at least was just a throw-away line. You do not win people over to your point of view by “shaming” them. How do WE feel when white-knight old men try to “shame” us? And how effective does that render their stratagy? Exactly.

You win people over to your side by making them understand that you feel their pain. Sounds hokey, but it worked for Bill Clinton. There are a lot of men out there with a lot of built-up anger and frustration. We need to be willing to listen to them (not as easy as it sounds) and to make them understand that we sympathize with them. Their frustrations and anxieties are legitimate, and we understand.

In the context of young Christian and/or socially conservative men, the particular angle is to say something like “your capacity for discipline and self-sacrifice are being used against you. That’s wrong and unfair, and I understand why that makes you angry.” For many young woman, conservative guys who take their faith seriously are used as the back-up guys, when fun time is over. These girls go out and sleep with every sleazy slick-talker at the club until they hit 32 years old, then they expect these solid, reliable religious guys to marry them and serve as husband and provider. Basically, to be the mop-up guy. Consider the numbers of “born-again virgins” – not actual virgins, but girls who are done with the party-slut phase of their life and get the church to say that they’re “spiritual” virgins, and to feed them these reliable, self-sacrificing guys.

This is wrong, and the beauty of this problem as a message is that you don’t need to explain to anyone why this is wrong. This makes the church-going guys angry, and you don’t need to explain to anyone why it makes them angry. It’s wrong, unfair, and ridiculous on its face. The pastors/deacons/parents/teachers/etc in the social conservative world are saying “be a MAN and marry these washed-up skanks! Don’t ask about their past – GOD has forgiven them. Man up!” Basically, telling them that their anger and frustration, as natural and understandable as they are under these circumstances, are not legitimate.

We need to be there so say “your anger is perfectly valid. I understand why you feeel that way.” You’d be amazed at how far a statement like that can go, especially when shaming and mocking language is coming at them from the other side. If we just get in on the shaming act, we throw that advantage away.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
American April 6, 2012 at 07:25

Migu, neo American Gender-Raunch have not only re-defined the term liberal to better fit in their “Constructions”, they have used semantics games on many terms in order to fit them better in their “constructions”.
“Patriarchy” and “matriarchy” is one of their greatest semantic games.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
American April 6, 2012 at 07:27

Migu, Gender-feminists have “Empowered” themselves on the backs of non gender-feminists by saying violence is patriarchal, when in fact the exact opposite is true, violence, chaos, broken-ness, lack of education….THATS ALL MATRIARCHY!!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
keyster April 6, 2012 at 08:14

@greyghost
“These sites you comment on. Would you say they have a large following. To really shake up the main stream.(get to really large numbers) very popular conservative types like Limbaugh,Sean Hannity, Mark Levin etc. need to be made aware of the red pill. Even limbaugh is a blue pill guy.”

OK everybody, raise your hand if you hate Rush Limbaugh.
Alright, of those with raised hands; who’s actually ever listened to his show? Yeah, I thought so.

He regularily skewers “the feminist-s-s-s” as he calls them. I agree he’s not Red Pill, but he’s as close as anyone who is that popular. His listening audience is about 8 million a day. He pretty much rules the radio. I listen to him sometimes, but can only take so much. I also listen to Democracy Now!, The Take Away, Al Jazeera and the BBC. (The left wing programs are exclusively on “publicly funded radio”, or receive federal funds to broadcast.)

You can’t trust any ONE source for information.
You have to listen to several.
They’re ALL biased.

Lately I’ve been listening to Laura Ingraham, who fancies herself kind of a Bill Maher for the Right…the ridicule and mockery schtick.

Yes, these are popular “right-wing orthodoxy” sites I comment on. AM radio and the internet are not owned by the Liberal Establishment, so its their only haven for conservative news, thought and opinion.

Take down the Old Media, spread the word through the New Media and you take back liberal control of the Narrative–and you take back the culture, and then you begin to affect the political balance. You destroy special interest victim groups and political correctness, and you ultimately destroy Femocracy, Inc.

This is what the Drudge Report was about, and then (like Manboobz to MRA sites) the HuffPo and DailyKos were established as an internet presence response.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
Migu April 6, 2012 at 08:20

Hand raised.

Haters listen to his show more than followers. It’s a formula for talk radio. You get most of your ratings from the people vehemently opposed to you. The host’s even tell their detractors this on a weekly basis.

That’s why I quit listening a few years ago. Same goes for most Mass Media, and that is what Rush is. Mass Media. You know Masses, as in dolts and useful idiots.

The language tricks are subtle until you spot the first few, then they are glaring.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Migu April 6, 2012 at 08:28

Migu, neo American Gender-Raunch have not only re-defined the term liberal to better fit in their “Constructions”, they have used semantics games on many terms in order to fit them better in their “constructions”.
“Patriarchy” and “matriarchy” is one of their greatest semantic games.

I would caution against isolating the means from the purposes. Means come first, if they aren’t consistent with establishing your purposes they will fail.

You won’t get what you want playing those same semantic games. You just play right into the narrative, and nobody even has to waste time writing you a script.

Your gender-raunch language manipulation strategy will fail you just as hard is it is failing those you label as such. Step out of it bro.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
tbc April 6, 2012 at 08:29

A key place of focus (if not THE key place) is academia. All of the pillars of society, influential people, policy makers, judges, politicians, educators, etc., pass through institutions of so-called higher education and it is there more than any other place that feminist/ progressivist ideology reigns supreme. It is from that perch that fem/prog ideas, laws, memes, and values have been perpetuated through society. It would be an admittedly long slow march; after all it has taken upwards of 50 years for fem/prog ideology to become the established norm in academia, but the rewards would be immeasureable. So either academia must be captured, or it must be marginalized — actually both should happen.

The ascendancy of the Academy corresponds to the marginalization of other sources of authority and of their eventual capitulation to fem/prog ideology. There was a time when there were competing sources of authority: church, university, civic clubs, etc., so when there was a crisis people would not consult the local academic, but the local pastor or priest, or “respected civic leader,” all of whom were male. The academia was ceded to fem/prog ideology because it was mostly irrelevant to people’s daily lives, until of course going to college became viewed as mandatory for any kind of successful life.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
keyster April 6, 2012 at 09:21

@Migu
“Haters listen to his show more than followers. It’s a formula for talk radio. You get most of your ratings from the people vehemently opposed to you. The host’s even tell their detractors this on a weekly basis.”

I’ll have to hatefully disagree with you.
People listen to and watch the programming that validates their world view; it makes them feel good.

The only strident liberals that listen to Rush are perhaps leftist media watchdog groups like “Media Matters”, so they can pluck outrageous comments from his 3 hours a day of chatter and say – “See! He’s a hater!”.

Every Liberal I’ve ever known HATES Rush Limbaugh.
Every Liberal I’ve ever known has also NEVER listened to his show.
But, they DO faithfully get their news from Jon Stewart every night.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Lovekraft April 6, 2012 at 09:28

Canada has had a majority Conservative gov’t and gave lip-service to reducing gov’t and bureaucratic reach. Quite indicative of how damaged our system is when Conservatives fail to even attempt to reverse decades of overreach and overspending.

Seems truly that Western gov’ts are in a ‘race to the bottom’, not caring to make the hard decisions. Perhaps this is because they have no interest in letting others take the credit, or reverse their efforts (which is what Socialists would do).

Quentin: Since there are almost no men-only spaces, I don’t have many places where I can detox myself of the poisons from this anti-male society.

It is unbelievable how quickly feminism and Political Correctness invaded any semblance of male-only spaces. Through a sustained campaign of legal force and social shaming, men have been on the defensive for decades.

When the female gets involved, everything turns mushy, unfocussed and lame.

BTW, youtube channel LVJ1112 has archived Tom Leykis audio shows, not to mention you can listen to his current show here:

http://blowmeuptom.com/The_Tom_Leykis_Show.html

You will have to download the player, tho’.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
American April 6, 2012 at 09:48

Migu, It seems many have a problem with me calling neo Gender-feminism (which is the dominant form practiced today) a type of gender , gender-raunch feminism.
You may be misunderstanding me here, Let me explain. “Gender” comes from what modern feminists now call themselves…”Gender-feminists”.
This term “gender” is then mixed with what Ariel Levy has termed “Neo Raunch Culture” feminism.
So i just abreviated the two and amalgamated into a simpler, but just as charecteristically effective…”Gender-Raunch”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
American April 6, 2012 at 09:50

To me, using the term “Gender-Raunch” is the most effective term to charecterize many of the most viral practicioners of modern American feminism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
jaego April 6, 2012 at 10:13

And a parallel: all these gung ho men who volunteer for the military. I can underestand someone who can’t find a job and who doesn’t know what else to do with himself. But guys who have their lives together with careers and family? They are so dumb that they really believe that fighting in the Middle East is protecting America – a nation that has utterly betrayed its people. Cultural lag is deadly. What a tragedy to sacrafice your life to a Nation that vanished many decades ago. Great Hearts need Great Heads to go with them. Seriously, these guys are the bricks that build and hold up a Nation. Some of the very best – but they have to wake the hell up.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Rob April 6, 2012 at 14:21

“Canada has had a majority Conservative gov’t and gave lip-service to reducing gov’t and bureaucratic reach. Quite indicative of how damaged our system is when Conservatives fail to even attempt to reverse decades of overreach and overspending.” — Lovekraft

I am profoundly disturbed by Stephen Harper. I really, really thought he “got it.” He worked his way up in politics by writing about, and attacking, many of the far-left, wingnut Marxist policies of “Trudeaupia.” He clearly understood, along with Preston Manning, and the rest of us in Western Canada, what happened when Trudeau and Chretien centralized government and ran by the policy of “Screw the West, We’ll Take the Rest.” (And, it worked – in Trudeau’s final election, he won, but did not win one single riding west of the Ontario border – One of our greatest PM’s? Pfft. I piss on his sorry ass memory).

Further, Harper clearly understood that the Constitution had to be re-opened and decentralized according to the original Articles of Confederation rather than by Trudeau’s monkeyed up version, and also that the Senate must be restored to be a true representative of provincial power over-riding the centralized federal power of Parliament. (Much like how US States have authority over the Federal Gov’t).

And, when Preston Manning and Stephen Harper were the Reform Party, which really only had Western support, they clearly understood these things, and also acknowledged that we do, under the original articles of Confederation, have the power to over-ride Trudeaupia and leave the whole damn country behind us. The question became then, do we leave Canada, or do we stand on our principles, stay with our Canadian brothers, and work to Reform Canada back into a state that works for the West. He clearly understands the difference between “Progressive Conservative” and “Conservative.”

And of course, Harper & Manning, went with “The West Wants In” (Which is why one of the first things that came out of his mouth when he won and became Prime Minister was, “The West Is IN!” – Chills went down my spine and I nearly cried, lol – We’re getting our country back!). Further, the West understood that he now had to create a majority and that would mean the West would have to be crapped on a bit. “We don’t care,” cries the West, “we’ll keep voting you in – so long as you actually DO have a ‘hidden agenda,’ wink, wink.” And Harper can cross into the West and randomly throw a dart at the board – it will hit a Conservative riding, the exact opposite of that shit-head Trudeau. The Western Separation Movement is nothing but a whisper anymore.

Further, even freedom fighting Americans like William S. Lind and Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation understood that Harper “knew” what was going – I mean, in the 1980′s, as Harper wrote and deconstructed Trudeaupia. You can’t do that unless you “get it.” Harper clearly does – and this is why Weyrich donated money to Harper’s campaign – but asked for the Foundation not to make too big a hoop-lah about it, but rather just quietly let the guy get elected.

It was very encouraging to see Harper, even with a minority gov’t, begin to reform the Senate into a body with some actual teeth. It was further encouraging that one of the first things he did as PM was pull funding from the SOW, snort, snort. (Status Of Women, Canada).

But, on the other hand, I’m kinda starting to stand up and ask, “Hey, wtf, bozo?” What’s up with this following along the Liberal’s idea of “if you donate $100 to say, the Haitian disaster, we’ll pull another $100 from your other pocket and match it in donations to the United Nations relief effort – so that the government doesn’t look cheap.” (He knows that is not the role of government – he used to write about it!)

What the hell is this, flying to the States to make speaches to the Council on Foreign Relations – I mean, what the hell?

What the hell is this, passing harsh laws regarding “elder abuse,” and not understanding that yet another social services industry that harms the fabric of the country is being created? How nice and “progressive” of you!

What the hell is this? Donating billions of our money to prop-up other countries during the economic crisis, devaluing our own currency at the same time? No more centralized government picking the people’s pockets to create Utopia, remember? Don’t tell us you don’t understand – you are an economist!

The guy “gets it” and can’t frickin’ say he doesn’t. Almost all of the “getting it” in Western politics was written by the man himself.

I’m becoming very discouraged with Harper. We’d better start seeing some of that hidden agenda soon, buddy.

Never trust a politician.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Eric April 6, 2012 at 14:56

Price:
Aside from the highly debatable statement that Dalrock actually ‘confronts’ social conservatism; these are all good points. But I don’t think that converting Socons is going to much easier than radical feminists; and I’m not even certain that conversion should be an MRM goal.

The Socons are just as hopeless as the feminists because they start from the same fundamental premises. A liberal feminist, for example, believes ‘all men are dogs’; a socon female basically believes that ‘all men are still dogs, but dogs can be trained and make good pets.’ Both philosophies hold female supremacy as the cultural norm.

At bottom, ‘gender politics’ (as the term implies) is essentially political. The MRM is revolutionary. We can only appeal to those who are willing to question the culture and think for themselves. A casual glance at the history of the American electorate during the last 25 or so years, should any answer questions about just how deep and reflective Americans (of either gender) actually are.

As far focus goes; I think the most badly needed function of the MRM is to expand its efforts to help and support men who realize the dysfunctionality of our system and need a support system to break free of it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Rob April 6, 2012 at 15:09

Lol! Sorry for my Canadian focused rant.

I kind of forgot to make my point.

There are a lot of people around, who understand “what is going on.” The Blogging Tories association, which I mentioned way further up, came into being because lots of them do understand that, since Trudeau created the state-funded CBC for preserving Canadian “culture,” that it has become nothing but a propaganda machine for the left-wing agenda, and that much of what is reported on in the media is bullshit. It’s why Harper doesn’t answer questions to the media anymore after sessions of Parliament – they’ve done everything they could to screw him over, so why should he give them the time of day? The Blogging Tories picked it up, and said, we’ll create our own media and the CBC and left wing media can go to hell.

I’ve had some pretty good success with going into groups such as this, and building a case based upon unemotional fact and government theory, and convincing them that feminism and other such things, are an abomination – in other words, it’s pretty easy to take things like the anti-abortion stance of so many Conservative women and build upon it. That lady with the sewing and crafts blog which I mentioned earlier, had those articles of mine listed on her sidebar under a heading of “All the reasons women need to know of why they should oppose feminism” or something like that, and she had my articles where I listed lots of quotes and evidence that the purpose of feminism is to destroy family and take children from mothers. I used to quietly follow along reading all the ladies’ comments and they were universally supportive comments. “Ugh!” Lots of them said, “That really is all I needed to know – they truly are an abomination.”

Most conservatives, especially women, oppose feminism solely because of abortion, but it is not all that difficult to move them to another level.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
keyster April 6, 2012 at 15:40

@Rob

Bush the younger pulled the same bull shit.
Medicare plan B
No child left behind
Etc…

It’s pandering to the middle, that oh so precious 20% Independents.

If Romney makes it to the WH, and I think he will, there’s a shitload of Conservatives, including the Tea Party, that will be bird-dogging him hard to stay to the right. Really that’s when the hard work begins as far as activism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
joeb April 6, 2012 at 15:47

WC strictly in an anthropological sense Introducing God and Morality give an unfair advantage to weaker Males or secondary suitors . I can not kill off the other cave men because I have to allow for laws based on a Christen Morality .
The same Christen morality that turns me into a slave .
One idea proceeds all ten commandment. Thew shall not enslave a nation So is it anti male to choose a party that wants to enslave Me .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
migu April 6, 2012 at 23:12

Liberals and conservatives are the same. You cannot isolate means from their purposes. Conservative’s want a whip. Liberals want a whip. The one who weilds the whip is the master, the other the slave. After the election, whoever holds the whip is master. I suppose it’s better than outright chattel. After all master can’t buy the slaves unless 51% of the auction block approves. So at least they have a slight chance of a benevolent master.

And in my experience the most avid Rush, hannity, ingraham, and the rest listeners are much the same as femtrolls on these websites. They listen for ammo.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Wudang April 7, 2012 at 03:28

“Keyster
These sites you comment on. Would you say they have a large following. To really shake up the main stream.(get to really large numbers) very popular conservative types like Limbaugh,Sean Hannity, Mark Levin etc. need to be made aware of the red pill. Even limbaugh is a blue pill guy. He is like a large number of men that know something is wrong and can’t put their finger on it. I think we have a good number of guys here that can become regular commenters on non mra sites and reach many more. Red pill any and all conservatives.
I regulaly comment on yahoo articles now as greyghost with a red pill style.”

I think it is key to comment and leave links to manosphere sites in the comment sections of sites such as the New York Times, CNN, FOX, the Athlantic. Not only do a lot of people and a lot of eduated people read those comment sections but from time to time so does people like Hanity, Levin, senators, lobbyists, editors of newspapers, Ivy League professors, authors, very rich men (that can give donations) etc. If the comment sections of most publications like that usually have some manosphere commenters dispelling red pill wisdom and providing links to the manosphere over time a very large percentage of those powerfull and important people will drop by manosphere sites.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Wudang April 7, 2012 at 03:31

A tip, the 50 shades of grey book is an extremely usefull tool to get people to open up to the true nature of female sexual desires and real gender dynamics. Whenever you see it discussed online say a few words about manosphere views and drop some links to Athol, Roissy etc.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rob April 7, 2012 at 09:52

I think it is key to comment and leave links to manosphere sites in the comment sections of sites such as the New York Times, CNN, FOX, the Athlantic.

I think one of the most effective campaigns I’ve seen so far was Puma’s Wedded Abyss.

That was the only page he had – no blog or anything. What he did was scan google-news regularly for MSM articles about marriage/gender issues, and as soon as he seen one he’d quickly run over there – never making more than a one or two line comment, and always tried to get near the top of the comments – and he’d just embed that link to his article in there. He was slways polite, never confrontational.

I don’t think Puma is around anymore – at least I haven’t seen him for quite a while – maybe a year or more now. But, I tell ya, only one of the links of the many on that page is to my site – I’m at the end of the article – and I’m still getting hits from his page every single day. Seems pretty effective to me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
American April 7, 2012 at 10:03

Eric, “Gender-politics”, very interesting.
This is America, and different groups are always going to be vying for “empowerment” over others. But this healthy and ever present political struggle for different groups in America takes an almost “Perverse” turn when American gender-feminists “Empower” themselves by creating a missinformation, and or “Manufactured statistics” Alliance with American law enforcement.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
David K. Meller April 8, 2012 at 10:47

Every effort to refine and expand our outreach to men who agree with us, and who are eager to work with us in various ways to reverse the effects of the feminist poison on our society is worthwhile and should be welcomed.

I am curious about the absence of attention to the ladies, however.

Just as feminists gained much, maybe even most, of their power by collaborating with renegade males, it is certainly worthwhile for us to look for women who, perhaps for reasons of their own, have misgivings about feminism, or who crave more “old-fashioned”, patriarchal types of men in their relationships, or who have themselves suffered at feminist hands.

Ignoring these women, especially since many of them already have seen feminists at their most objectionable, and would be natural allies of normal men and boys, seems shortsighted and foolish. Feminuttery, in all of its ugly aspects, did not achieve its triumphs without at least some “men” working with them, and I don’t see how it can be reversed without us working with disaffected and unhappy women, both single and married, who are constitutionally unusually feminine (as the term is generally understood) or are revolted by gendermixed “unisex” and androgeny common to much feminism. A personal aversion to active lesbianism (lesbophobia?) can’t hurt either, although homosexuality, for both sexes, is rather a different can of worms!

In all of our efforts to win back our future, and our species, let’s not forget the ladies! They may have even more to lose than we have.

PEACE AND FREEDOM!
David K. Meller

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
GKChesterton April 12, 2012 at 09:48

Logic worked with me and I have (fortunately) never had any feminist caused life crisis. In fact I would say that the shaming language is the biggest turn off.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Wudang April 13, 2012 at 19:25

Rob:

The wedded abyss strategy sounds brilliant. THat you are still getting hits speaks volumes. Someone really should take it upon themselves to do that regularily. I do a fair share of trolling on mainstream forums and either tell men that need to learn some game or relationship game to read certain PUAs or Athols blog or I link to manosphere sites in all sorts of gender issue debates. I think giving advice and providing links to guys in dating or relationship crisis is quite effective. THese are guys that normally doN`t go on the web much but because of their problem they log on and ask for advice. The crisis makes them open to change and examining things.

I think key to the battle we are fighting is spreading the basic understannding of the real dynamic between the sexes. I have seen a lot of evidence that manosphere knowledge is spreading and anyone giving relationship or dating advice is starting to at least become aware of the arguments from PUAs even though they highly disagree. So I think continued trolling of all sorts of sites and forums that discuss sex and LTR slowly will lead to winning that battle. The battle for the larger male rights agenda will be won with that understanding of gender dynamics as a foundation.

One thing I haven`t seen anyone mention before that is highly relevant in the US is the Latinos. They are a large and quickly growing group and they are more conservative and more gender traditional than white america. Because they have media directed to them exclusively and because there is some degree of cohesion trolling blogs, forums and online media that targets latinos is probably more effective than trolling mainstream sites.

A rather large and growing group that Will be a natural aly but that many of you probably see as wrking in the oposite direction is everyone onvolved with yoga, meditation, qigong, tantra, Budhism etc. THe fact is that all of these traditions are absolutely categorical that the genders are highly different and htat these differences are positive. THey see men as being yang and women as being yin and they see the yin yang dynamic as being played out at all levels of existence so this understanding is so deeply embeded in these traditions it is impossible to change and highly draws people away from blank slate views. There is a streak in some of these traditions when reinterperated by new age people become this woman wrshiping matriarchy goddess loving cult but that is a side track to the core of the traditions and the ifnluence they actually are having and that will be rooted out over time. If you go to forums about meditation, qigong, yoga etc. You will find hte highest level of game aware people I have ever seen outside of the manosphere. The guys there are all highly into self devolopment and part of that development have been to discover hte demasculation society has put them through and tehir dificulties with women and that have led them to PUA which they in turn recomend to others who come to the forums. Virtually teh only women I have encountered outside the manopshere which are into developing their femininity and wh explicitly understand the captain and first officer mode are women who have had long experience with yoga, tantra, qigong etc. so this is also one way which women are influence din the right direction.

To small but not irrelevant recruting grounds are the BDSM community and bodybuilder forums. Bodybuilder forums are full of men that are concerned about masculinity in one way or antoher and who want to raise their sex rank. THey are easy to make understand the views of the manosphere and if we spend some time trolling them eventually PUA wisdom pluss ome MRA stuff will become something the guys at the forums recomend to newcomers. THe BDSM community understands sexual polarity very well. THey knew what a shit test was before any PUA books had been written. THey understand PUA psychology quite naturally and have a deep apreceation for masculin dominance. PUA knowledge can be tied in to the BDSM community in a way that makes sure those who come in contact with it will be informed of it and recomended it. This in turn leads to MRA awareness. HTe site takeninhand.com has already started to see some cross fertilization between PUAs and people ighly into sexual domination. PUAs frequently refer to the sites and know PUAs have been writing stuff on the site. An additional advantage of targeting the BDSm community a little bit is that this is a place where women who understand they apreceate dominance come to learn. THey are the most easily turned women you can find.

A common theme amongst many of the wommen that are present in the manopshere is that they are critical of and have had bad experiences with women and female culture. Take a look at the thread at hookingupsmart.com about women holding women back in the workplace and you will see examples of this. Or read the blogs of Grerp at the lostartofselfpreservation and Olive here:

http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com/

I am not sure how you find or target such women but I think it is a good idea to have the women in the manopshere start writing guest posts about hte female to female dynamics and the problems women typically face with each other. To me it seems near universal that women have had some very harsh experiences with other womens game playing, backstabbing, powerplays, disloyalty etc. When you give women a good way to talk about that they suddenly become really engaged because they are so pissed about it and have had so little chances to discuss it publicly before. By doing this we can hook in quite a few women by foucsing on the key thing they loathe about female culture and want to change.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: