Eivind Berge Arrested for Provocative Rhetoric

by W.F. Price on July 7, 2012

Eivind Berge has been posting some pretty provocative stuff for quite a while now, including his desire to kill police for enforcing misandric laws. I agree with his girlfriend that it was a bunch of hot air, but he got arrested for it anyway. Despite his support for Anders Breivik, who decimated the youth wing of the Marxist/Islamist Norwegian left in a solo Knights Templar crusade last year, I seriously doubt Eivind would have carried out any violent acts. Breivik, who really meant business, kept his plans to himself.

The truth is that people who manage to pull off spectacular terrorist attacks are almost always those who don’t say anything about them beforehand. Think Mohammed Atta vs. James Ujaama.

The lesson here is that if you want to be political, there’s a sort of tortoise/hare dynamic at work. The impetuous, fast hare tends to run out of steam (or run into trouble with the law) fairly quickly. The slow-and-steady tortoise, on the other hand, keeps trudging on and wins the race.

I count myself as fairly lucky to have been educated in this from a young age. I used to catalog extremist movements (mainly jihadi Muslim), and learned a great deal about what is effective and what isn’t. Certainly, terror attacks work, but operational secrecy is paramount. This means that threatening to kill people openly and loudly is essentially worthless. Either you operate out in the open honestly, eschewing illegal tactics, or you operate in the shadows as a murderous killer, like our intelligence agencies — you can’t have it both ways. Obviously, I personally prefer and advocate the former approach, but both work, as CIA drone attacks so clearly demonstrate.

Although feminists will be very eager to seize the “high ground” here, I’d like to remind people of the kind of stuff leftists were saying and doing in the 1960s and 70s.

Bernardine Dohrn, Bill Ayers’ wife, famously said that she would not condemn violence, and then went on a bombing campaign. She and her husband are now friends of our president.

Dohrn was a real terrorist, and a feminist, and walks free today, celebrated. She and Bill Ayers are suspected of being involved in bombing a San Francisco police station, killing one officer. History truly is written by the victors…

We shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking that violent action will do us any good. Of course violence does work, but the power of the state is so overwhelming today that individual acts are almost certain to fail. Furthermore, those who are willing to unleash violence on others must be prepared to die themselves, and must lead by example. Somehow, I don’t think many of us have reached that point. It’s a long road to get there, and I hold out the hope that it will never go that far.

the point is that anyone who condones violent action loudly and publicly, but doesn’t back it up, can’t be taken seriously.

In the end, it’s all just hot air. Hopefully, the Norwegian courts will give Berge the same consideration our courts gave Ms. Dohrn, and keep it all in perspective. Whatever he may have written, Berge hasn’t harmed anyone, nor has he gone so far as to promise to kill anyone in particular, so he should be released.

Berge’s rhetoric was ill-considered and pointless, and he was skating on thin ice, but his speech was probably lawful by American standards. I suppose we’ll see what the standards are in Norway, but I wish those who blabber about “action” would leave the rest of us out of it. Neither I nor other men have time to indulge fantasies and posing, and these show trials and political arrests don’t do us a bit of good. In fact, all they do is give the state the opportunity to scare people into silence, and that’s exactly what our enemies want.

{ 88 comments… read them below or add one }

Hermitcrab July 7, 2012 at 18:59

Scare tactics like this sometimes backfire.

Finland had a blogger who had paid attention to issues such as immigration and crime. The Finnish prosecutor’s office decided to sue him, though if memory serves, the prosecutor was essentially playing a card that ended up sounding like this:
“This is slander!”
“Slandered? Who? Did someone complain?”
“No, but… they ought to have!”
“Who?”
“Well, since they didn’t, the state will press charges.”

In a very ironic twist, his trial was publicized, the next election saw the blogger catapulted to parliament by quite a big spike in voting, and what used to be a blog known only to a few Internet commenters suddenly became national headlines.

Probably not the outcome the people trying to silence him had hoped for, but it’s what you get when you try to douse fires by using a drum of gasoline.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 2
Eric July 7, 2012 at 19:10

Price:
‘…operate in the shadows as our own murderous intelligence agencies.’

An important point: these same murderous intelligence agencies have absolutely no compunction about using their own hired plants to incite violent actions among groups they have already plotted (along with their chums in the mass media) to discredit. They have a documented track-record of just very kind of underhanded double-dealing.

As you pointed out, the feminists—like all fanatics—have no problem with using ‘politically correct’ violence. As we have all seen repeatedly, violence against men is socially and politically sanctioned violence. A man committing violence in defense of his rights is labelled a ‘terrorist’ or an ‘extremist’. The case of Thomas Ball is a perfect example. In a country like Tunisia, where public suicides make an impression on the public mind, the media scum here merely dismiss or ignore it.

Passive resistance is always like walking a tightrope. The feminist elites are bullies who are aware of their power and our inability to ‘push back’ in any way that will cause them deserved pain (at least for now). But like all bullies, they are also rabid egomaniacs and fear anyone who doesn’t bow slavishly to their power. The more men who are informed as to their true nature and who are taught to despise them, the weaker these bullies become because their fear of exposure and losing their power is a mania.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 2
MRA July 7, 2012 at 20:14

Although feminists will be very eager to seize the “high ground” here, I’d like to remind people of the kind of stuff leftists were saying and doing in the 1960s and 70s.

Feminists are already advocating for laws here in NY and others states to give every women the right to carry a gun, I mean with permission without a background check, just because they are women they should have the permission, the excuse this time was so women can defend themselves from sexual attack.

Here is a Occupy Oakland
“Disarm Cops, Arm Feminists”
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/OWS-Feminists.jpg

Can you imagine the situation where every women is carrying a gun? women already get free pass in courts when they murder their husbands and children at cold blood, now imagine they also have the right to carry a gun.

You ain’t got to be accurate, you just got to get close’: Sheriff urges women to carry guns to avoid being raped

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056197/South-Carolina-Sheriff-Chuck-Wright-tells-women-carry-guns-avoid-rape.html#ixzz1zzrIXFHS

A women would shoot any men and claim “rape” so she walks free, the man already is dead and can’t defend himself, because she made sure to shoot 10 bullets in his chest.

Never mind men are 3 times more victims of violence than women, if someone should carry guns is men no women.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 2
J July 7, 2012 at 20:32

I can’t agree with this enough!

We need to avoid violence, that si what the state wants, like Price said it is easy for them then to scare the public to vote the feds more authority!

Instead we MUST form a strong political movement while the people at least still feel their vote should count! Once they all feel their vote is meaningless, it is quite possible they will accept it and just give up!

We need to aact now, or just accept the commentor’s opinion above that when a women is done with us, she can sue us for everything, then shoot us when it is convenient and get evne more cock from the carousel!

We have to take these dudes down, peacefully of course! Like I said, we need to destroy a federal politicians career, and numerous family court judges and state legislators before 2016 elections as a movement!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3
Anonymous July 7, 2012 at 20:36

“Although feminists will be very eager to seize the “high ground” here, I’d like to remind people of the kind of stuff leftists were saying and doing in the 1960s and 70s. ”

Mary Daly had a job in academia…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Paul Murray July 7, 2012 at 20:41

A paradox of political violence is that you can’t commit terrorist acts without secrecy, but you can’t affect political discourse without publicity. Another one is that terrorists who create political change by acts of terror can’t actually run a government. They are shit at the boring stuff.

The Irish managed this by splitting into an activist bomb-planting wing ad a public political party that disavowed the actions of the radical;s (although everyone knew otherwise).

Arguably, the IRA worked. I’d argue otherwise: the rift in Ireland, so far as it is healed at a all, has been healed by the birth of a younger generation that just doesn’t give a shit about religion or 300-year-old wars. Don’t know if the feminist/masculist divide can be healed similarly. Unlike religion, the male/female divide is real.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 4
walking in hell2 July 7, 2012 at 22:37

I just read Berge’s blog. Provocative, but not too much so. I didn’t realize how bad things were in Finland. The police put one man in prison because a girl who had been drunk said she didn’t “feel” right in the presence of that man. She felt like “something” happened when she was drunk, but couldn’t name it. What a travesty of justice.

I think the next step of the men’s awareness movement should be something like this: a s separation of the sexes.

I would like to see a contractor or developer challenge the system and create a living community for men only: shopping mall, apartments, gym, etc. The legal precedent could be something like the desire for male patrons to avoid any type of legal hassles or the negative perceptions and harassment that are thrown on them by women, white knights, and manginas. I for one would live in such a community just to avoid the disgusting sight, smell, sound, and evil motives of Westernized females. The community could have men’s entertainment, where strippers, etc could come to work, but could not live in the community.

In Eastern Europe, women are not allowed into certain establishments. This preserves some place for the men to get away.

I would also like to see the work place separated into male and female sections, where it would be impossible to hear or see any female coworker during the day.

Once I shared a small office with two women around 15 years older than me. One day one of the women was out of the office. I was talking to the other one and I received a phone call so I had to take it. The women with who I was talking, got angry that I took the call cutting off our conversation. About one minute later she accused me of “coming at her.” I just turned and ignored her. If she wanted, she could have made that accusation to my boss and got me into big trouble. The sick thing is, the woman was so old and ugly, no romantic thought had ever entered my head about her. This was going to be my defense had she pushed her sick agenda.

Separate “male only” communities and job spaces are an organized and commercial form of MGTOW. I think it is the next logical step. Western women are just too toxic to mix and live with and not worth the risk of being harassed and falsely accused and sent to prison.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 10
troll king July 7, 2012 at 23:27

ot.

Servicewomen’s group critical of anti-’women in combat’ editorial

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/05/servicewomens-group-critical-of-anti-women-in-combat-editorial/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
jaego July 7, 2012 at 23:47

Ander Breivik stands tall for White Men and Western Civilization against Liberals, Women, Muslims etc in his closing statement. Here:

http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/07/anders-breiviks-closing-statement-final-day-june-22-2012/#more-28615

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 14
evilwhitemalempire July 7, 2012 at 23:50

I would like to see a contractor or developer challenge the system and create a living community for men only: shopping mall, apartments, gym, etc. The legal precedent could be something like the desire for male patrons to avoid any type of legal hassles or the negative perceptions and harassment that are thrown on them by women, white knights, and manginas.
——————————
would never be allowed

constitutes a ‘male space’ like no other

Separate “male only” communities and job spaces are an organized and commercial form of MGTOW. I think it is the next logical step. Western women are just too toxic to mix and live with and not worth the risk of being harassed and falsely accused and sent to prison.
——————–
the whole point of the sexual grievance industry is to empower females through the institutionalization of sexual blackmail

how can they do that if there’s no interaction?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 2
Eric July 8, 2012 at 00:04

To those interested, Futrelle is already gloating over Berge’s arrest, and has devoted an unusually long article to it.

Why is anything Fatrelle says of any consequence?

Because it illustrates that the anti-MRM forces are primed and ready for a ‘false flag’ or provocateur-instigated ‘incident’. Manboob couldn’t even resist bringing up Thomas Ball again as an object as ridicule.

This is indicative of a shift in anti-MRM tactics, part of trend that has been growing recently. The feminist elites have noticably shifted from typical ridicule to painting the MRM as a dangerous extremist movement. The increased attention from the SPLC and other whackos was the opening salvo in this shift. Futrelle has upped the ante another notch. The feminist establishment is getting noticably more nervous.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 3
W.F. Price July 8, 2012 at 00:30

Servicewomen’s group critical of anti-’women in combat’ editorial

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/05/servicewomens-group-critical-of-anti-women-in-combat-editorial/

-troll king

The original editorial they’re criticizing is pretty good. She spells out problems we civilians wouldn’t think of. I didn’t consider the muscle wasting issue and resultant hormonal problems for women. Really sad that the woman lost her fertility from the stress of combat. What a terrible disappointment — what a waste.

walking in hell2 July 8, 2012 at 00:57

@eric

Funny. I read manboobz and Futrelle really stepped up the rhetoric. He almost seems nervous. I don’t understand why. MRAs are as harmless and passive of a group as they come.

I really don’t like this white, nationalist, anti-muslim strain of anti-feminism. I am a white guy, and to me, an American man’s biggest fear should be his government. Therefore, there is no reason to be nationalistic.

Also, Muslims and Sharia law will liberate men from feminism and have done a much better job at subduing feminism than any other group. Muslims and Sharia law are great friends to those men who value the traditional husband, wife, children, and family structure.

I detect lots of “nationalism” and anti-muslim sentiment in many of the “MRM” blogs. I really don’t understand the logic of this. Maybe someone can explain to me why so many MRAs are anti-muslim.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 20
ralph gorman July 8, 2012 at 01:25

I pointed out that when the Jewish underground in Palestine was killing English soldiers right and left in the 1940′s, that Mr. Ben Hecht wrote in a New York newspaper that “the Jews of America made a ‘little holiday in their hearts’”. No one prosecuted him for “hate speech” or “incitement to violence”. Don’t we have the same standard in the comments section for everybody?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6
ralph gorman July 8, 2012 at 01:28

The real problem with women in combat is that the society cannot afford to kill them off in large numbers because men cannot bear the children to replace them. Take the three Roman disasters culminating at Cannae. Had the Romans killed off all their baby factories on the battlefield they could never have won the war at Zama twenty years later. It is that simple.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 18
Eric July 8, 2012 at 01:39

WalkinginHell:
I don’t know enough about Islam to comment on it one way or the other; but I figure that since the government, media, and academia all hate it, it must have some valuable qualities!

The major problem I have with white nationalists is that they never can get around the fact that white anglo-american women are responsible for the demise of the white race. And, of course, there’s no way they can reproduce the race without them, so they’re caught in a double-bind.

I agree totally with your observations about the government.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 6
Eric July 8, 2012 at 01:54

WalkinginHell:
PS>on Futrelle. He does seem unusally worked up. From Socon/mangina side, I’ve noticed the same ratcheting up of the rhetoric from Tommy Fleming lately.

I have the feeling that something ominous is in the wind.

This kind of language out of the Mangina League; the SPLC’s attention; the spate of troll and provocateur attacks and hacking on mens’ blogs; this crap going on in Scandanavia—there’s definately a pole-shift among our enemies and it stinks of orchestration.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2
evilwhitemalempire July 8, 2012 at 01:59

Maybe someone can explain to me why so many MRAs are anti-muslim.
—————–

as far as i’ve been able to ascertain there are two schools of anti-muslim mra

the most common is based in conservatism

for most conservatives, particularly hard right, feminism is seen as merely a PART of the problem of liberalism

another perceived problem of liberalism is the masses of foreigners it imports to maintain it’s voting base

in other words they are anti-muslim because they are conservative

and they are anti-fem because they’re conservative

but they are NOT anti-muslim BECAUSE they’re anti-fem

make sense now?

[another way to see it is this: why are feminists pro-muslim of all things? are they pro-muslim because they are masochists? or are they pro-muslim because they're liberals?]

the other less common school of thought reckons that there’s a hidden break in sharia law for feminists

the idea is that feminism is driven primarily by the sexual jealousy of older less attractive females seeking to eliminate sexual competition from younger, more attractive ones

here it is reckoned that the real reason feminists seldom criticize islam is not because the feminist is just towing leftists’ ideological party line but instead because they see the burka as a way of stifling sexual competition

a few years ago feminist naomi wolfe wrote a glowing article about those beekeeper suits and how they could keep her hubby from looking at other women

“Our husbands see naked women all day—in Times Square if not on the Net. Her husband never even sees another woman’s hair.
She must feel, I thought, so hot.”

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/trends/n_9437/

probably the leading mra of this school of thought is schopenbecq

http://theantifeminist.com/what-feminism-is/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3
Ted July 8, 2012 at 02:26

“The real problem with women in combat is that the society cannot afford to kill them off in large numbers because men cannot bear the children to replace them. ”

Not so true these days. Used to be a woman had to bear eight or so children to ensure the continuation of the family. Now it’s down to 2.1 or close. That means there’s a lot of spare capacity in the system that could be called on in an emergency.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5
evilwhitemalempire July 8, 2012 at 02:29

the real problem with women in combat is that it indicates that technology has advanced to a point that killing can be done without even breaking fingernails

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
ralph gorman July 8, 2012 at 02:33

Ted:

You are kidding yourself. Soldiers die in huge numbers in war. Look at WW1 and 2. There is no way for a population to replace those kind of demographic losses if the females of child bearing age are butchered.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8
Ted July 8, 2012 at 02:46

It depends on the numbers.

In the event of such a catastrophe – and it doesn’t have to be combat, could be something like a large epidemic – the surviving women could produce and look after up to an extra six or so children each, depending on age. This would take up all their time and effort, and they would need to be supported by those not involved with children – that is, men. A return to the good old days! Don’t think I would like it very much though.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price July 8, 2012 at 02:48

I pointed out that when the Jewish underground in Palestine was killing English soldiers right and left in the 1940′s, that Mr. Ben Hecht wrote in a New York newspaper that “the Jews of America made a ‘little holiday in their hearts’”. No one prosecuted him for “hate speech” or “incitement to violence”. Don’t we have the same standard in the comments section for everybody?

-ralph gorman

Ralph, this site isn’t about “the Jews of America.” It really annoys me when people try to make it into that. It would annoy me just as much if Jewish readers came here and tried to bash some other ethnic group, but guess what? They don’t do that here.

I proscribe ethnic/religious attacks for a reason, and that reason is that I do not want this site to lose its focus, which it most certainly will if we all start fighting over race, religion, etc.

Ted July 8, 2012 at 02:48

“Look at WW1 and 2.”

WW1 – my grandparent’s time. Eight children per family. Now, how many?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Ted July 8, 2012 at 02:56

“PS>on Futrelle. He does seem unusally worked up.”

He does. These tales of violence certainly seem to excite him. I can’t help wondering what goes on in his mind.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Eric July 8, 2012 at 03:05

Ted:
‘I can’t help wondering what goes on in his mind.’

Futrelle is a very sick man. He obviously enjoys humiliation at the hands of women, but overly fears violent retribution from males. Normally, I would write this off just as another symptom of the psychosexual neurosis that he obviously has. But combined with all the other heated rhetoric going on, I worry that it might have a deeper significance on a wider scale.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4
Ted July 8, 2012 at 03:13

Jews, Muslims… all one big happy family, really.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/06/27/jonathan-kay-muslims-and-jews-finally-come-together-to-champion-circumcision/

“And so it has come to pass that after centuries of hate, Muslims and Jews finally have been brought together by the human penis — in particular, the shared desire to chop part of it off.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Ted July 8, 2012 at 03:17

Eric:

“Futrelle … fears violent retribution”

I get the impression that he is rather looking forward to it. Yes, this *does* seem sick.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Art Vandelay July 8, 2012 at 03:21

here it is reckoned that the real reason feminists seldom criticize islam is not because the feminist is just towing leftists’ ideological party line but instead because they see the burka as a way of stifling sexual competition

I don’t think so. You seldom see a burka in Europe, the French even banned it (and they are not conservatives by any stretch of imagination).

Feminists don’t like anything that limits women’s choices, so long as it’s from their approved list of choices a woman may make, e.g. being a whore is good, staying at home to raise the kids is betrayal.

The ever stronger foothold of Islam in Europe is an unintended consequence, the basic idea of multiculturalism is I think to undermine the European culture, as it is deemed patriarchic and oppressive and it must be extinguished before a new and improved culture (or no culture at all) can arise. They are thinking just as they can turn our men into supplicating manginas so they can with the muslim men.

Clearly that doesn’t seem to work out, only half of the equation works, the destruction of European culture. But I don’t think they can own up to their mistake and as it is typical with many lefties cognitive dissonance kicks in and they even fail to acknowledge that there is a problem.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price July 8, 2012 at 03:34

Eric:

“Futrelle … fears violent retribution”

I get the impression that he is rather looking forward to it. Yes, this *does* seem sick.

-Ted

Nah, Futrelle is using the same worn template that leftist activists have been using since the 1990s. What they do is lobby for police/government harassment and oppression of people who express views they oppose. It’s really just an attempt to control the discourse through coercion, and it does work to some extent, but only if you play their game and take them seriously. The key is simply not to let them get your goat, because then you might start saying and doing dumb things. Takes discipline, but it’s entirely possible.

Ted July 8, 2012 at 03:38

“the basic idea of multiculturalism is I think to undermine the European culture”

I’d like to suggest a different, and blind, mechanism.

Western wealth has meant women don’t have to trade their child-bearing facility so much. They can get by with below replacement level numbers of children. Any resulting population gap has to be made up from immigration. Multiculturalism is just an attempt to ease the immigrants into the host culture. If this is correct, the immigrants will eventually adapt to the host culture – in an economic sense, this is unavoidable – and their birthrate will eventually drop too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
Eric July 8, 2012 at 03:44

Ted:
“I get the impression he is rather looking forward to it. Yes, it ‘does’ seem sick.’

LOL—no wonder he never ‘quotemines’ either one of us.

Well, nobody ever said that the anti-MRM wasn’t made up of a bunch of whackos. If something big really IS coming down the pike, he might be hoping for some cheap thrills along the way. But he’s useful to the feminists for spreading the hysteria in the meantime.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Turbo the Drycleaner July 8, 2012 at 04:02

The MRM could learn a lesson from Lincoln’s 1860 campaign strategy.

Lincoln ran for president at one of the worst times in our nation. Extremists on both sides of the fence were at each others throats. both political parties regularly engaged in shouting matches and occasionally fistfights in the house and senate. A complete Us vs. Them scenario. Similar to now.

Lincoln wanted slavery abolished but decided it was useless to run on the usual republican platform; instead he ran as a very moderate man. He never talked about slavery and instead insisted that all he wanted was to preserve the union. As a result, while extremists on both sides disparaged him, he won everybody on the fence who didnt want a war and won easily.

Later, he changed his tune and started talking about abolition, as can be seen in speeches like the gettysburg adress and the emancipation proclamation. But he didnt polarize himself while he still needed support.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
Art Vandelay July 8, 2012 at 04:43

Multiculturalism is just an attempt to ease the immigrants into the host culture. If this is correct, the immigrants will eventually adapt to the host culture – in an economic sense, this is unavoidable – and their birthrate will eventually drop too.

Well, you could take immigrants from more compatible cultures with values that are not that much opposed to your own, Asia comes to mind, Southern Europe and in the recent history Eastern Europe and Russia.

It seems you are right about the birth rates though, it seems to be decreasing with time. It’s often not feasible to have a large family in Europe.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
walking in hell2 July 8, 2012 at 05:16

@Eric

Can you tell me where I can read Tommy Flemming’s stuff? I googled his name, but the only thing I came up with was the Irish singer, Tommy Flemming. I don’t think it is the same guy.

Thanks.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Opus July 8, 2012 at 05:25

Whatever one thinks of Berge (previously unknown to me) one thing is clear: the numbers of those opposing Feminism is growing. No such thing as bad publicity?

I have come to the conclusion that Academia is now irrelevant to radical thought. It may still be at the cutting edge of STEM subjects, but in terms of humanities the calibre of the writing and the accuity of thought coming from blogs, especially MRM blogs entirely outpaces and outclasses Academia. It rather reminds me of the eighteenth century where the new thought was coming in letters being sent round Europe by the intellectuals: men like Liebniz almost all of whose writings are in letters. The Internet is the new Postal Service. Find me one, just one academic who will not (like a victim of Stockholm Syndrome) pay humble obeisance to Feminism and various other politically correct ideologies – and these guys are supposed to be the thinking elite!

My Father, was, in 1946, a British Army Officer, stationed in Palestine – though he was always pro-Israel – so I may be forgiven agreeing with Ralph Gorman, though it is not clear to me where he was pointing out what he says he is repeating. I took his point to be relevant to the thread though not specifically an anti-Jewish point. Last night they played Indiana Jones Raiders film on telly, here; a film I find morally reprehensible.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Rocco July 8, 2012 at 05:37

I’m not a lawyer, I’m a political activist of many years.

But, I have never been involved in a political movement in the US that advocated violence. I was a Nadar Raider in college and helped form a labor union at work so I have training and experience.

When we formed the labor union just getting the votes was enough to get managments attention. At the first bargaining session we conceded that a work action was not possible (we were paid too much, publicity would kill us).

Similairly, men are scary and best not to put threats of physical action forward.

However men are also brilliant so use our brains instead of brawn to win. The last few years top notch thinkers have made their voices heard and I think we can see success everywhere with this approach, but it will take decades.

One of the main differences between the US and other countries is our constitution which is what we are talking about here, in the US we cannot be arrested or prosecuted for political speech no matter how much hyperbole or inflammatory rhetoric we use.

We cannot cry “fire” in a movie theatre and knowing lie about some individual (or corperation), that’s liable.

Since these servers are located in the US they have the protections listed above.

For other countries and the many guys here who participate, I would get very familiar with your laws before posting in public views that could get you arrested.

A cold wind is blowing, there is a feminist backlash against the (to you guys non-existent) mens rights movement.

Remember: First they ignore you, then the fight you then you win. 5 years ago they were ignoring us. Signs of victory with Mass and the VAWA are on the horizon.

The tide has turned and as long as we keep on track we will make it to shore and hopefully negotiate an America where men don’t feel like expaitriation is the only way to relate to women and have children safely.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3
migu July 8, 2012 at 06:39

Might want to doublecheck your Lincoln history. Lincoln did not want to abolish slavery. Start in 1858 with the Douglas debates.

Lincoln wanted to deport and intern black people. Had the executive orders ready to go. Be thankful for john Wilkes Booth.

I recommend Professor DiLorenzo’s book “The real Lincoln”

His sources hold up. Happy unlearning!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5
ralph gorman July 8, 2012 at 08:06

Ted is correct that open immigration was, at least initially, an effort by Europeans to compensate for a below replacement level birth rate by the indigeneous whites. He is also correct that female losses in war are a numbers game – with the greater the number of females killed the greater the demographic damage. Soviet Russia, in particular, took a very long time to recover from WW2, not merely because of Stalin’s inhumane policies but also because of the large number of Soviet females killed in combat.

Hoeever, any idea that racially incompatible immigrants who hate the whites will assimilate because of purely economic reasons is fantasy. Moreover, there is provably one particular group behind the diversity push in all nations – a group that has never truly assimilated anywhere and which has no intention of assimilating now.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6
Marcel July 8, 2012 at 08:08

So…you’d prefer the police wait until he actually *kills* somebody instead of doing their job (making an attempt to prevent violence by addressing explicitly violent rhetoric)?

Mind, you’re defending a guy who proclaims that men cannot be raped/abused (save for being denied sex from women), and that women cannot commit rape or sexual abuse.

You’re honestly okay with all that?

The grounds upon which you defend him are terribly shaky. Sure, it’s possible that he blabbed his nasty wishes all over the internet because he didn’t mean business. But it’s also possible that he was quite serious…and really, really stupid. It’s even likely, given that nothing he’s said particularly smacks of intelligence (or even logic), and that he was utterly oblivious to the fact that it’s against the law to threaten to kill the police in Norway.

If you have any desire to see the MRM advance or garner any positive attention from the media, you’re seriously backing the wrong horse on this one. You want people to believe that MRA’s mean no harm? Then stop trying to protect guys who get their rocks off at the thought of killing cops.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9
ralph gorman July 8, 2012 at 08:15

Migu is correct. Lincoln spent his entire political career seeking to deport blacks from the United States. He came up with many schemes, including deporting them to Panama, Africa, various British colonial possessions in Central America, the island of San Domingo, etc., only to be thwarted by various groups who wanted to use the newly emancipated blacks for their own purposes here in the USA. (such as the radical Republicans who wished to use them as voters against the South during Reconstruction, northern industrialists who wanted to employ them as cheap labor, etc.).

It is kind of like nineteenth century feminists who regarded blacks as inferior – and who thought giving white women the vote would add to white male votes to oppose all the unfit people flooding into America from Eastern Europe. Such are the forgotten facts of history – and the entirely different mindset of nineteenth century white Americans.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4
Justinian July 8, 2012 at 08:32

There is a proper way to deal with an oppressor. Forget Sodini or Breivik, or Thomas Ball.

Read up on Jack Hinson.

Jack Hinson’s One-Man War

A quiet, unassuming, and wealthy plantation owner, Jack Hinson was focused on his family life and seasonal plantings when the Civil War started to permeate the isolated valleys of the Kentucky-Tennessee border area where he lived. He was uniquely neutral–friend to both Confederate and Union generals–and his family exemplified the genteel, educated, gracious, and hardworking qualities highly valued in their society. By the winter of 1862, the Hinsons’ happy way of life would change forever. Jack Hinson’s neutrality was shattered the day Union patrols moved in on his land, captured two of his sons, accused them of being bushwhackers, and executed them on the roadside. The soldiers furthered the abuse by decapitating the Hinson boys and placing their heads on the gateposts of the family estate. The Civil War, now literally on Hinson’s doorstep, had become painfully personal, and he could remain dispassionate no longer. He commissioned a special rifle, a heavy-barreled .50-caliber weapon designed for long-range accuracy. He said goodbye to his family, and he took to the wilderness seeking revenge. Hinson, nearly sixty years of age, alone, and without formal military training, soon became a deadly threat to the Union. A Confederate sniper, he made history after single-handedly bringing down an armed Union transport and serving as a scout for Nathan Bedford Forrest. A tenacious and elusive figure, Hinson likely killed more than one hundred Union soldiers, recording the confirmed deaths on the barrel of his rifle with precision.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Opus July 8, 2012 at 08:38

It has long puzzled me, why, in Ford Theatre, Washington, underneath the box where Wilkes slayed Lincoln there is a portrait of Colonel Washington?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
universe July 8, 2012 at 09:53

…but I wish those who blabber about “action” would leave the rest of us out of it. WFP

– To put this isolated quote into context, the ‘action’ said author refered to was of the verboten use of ‘violence’ – “physical force so as to injure”: Websters Dictionary – for bringing attention to issues.
But action should not preclude: writing letters to bureacrats/politicians, the engaging in and of public consciousness toward men’s concerns – public demostrations of the multiple referenced truths discussed here and other blog sites – or even organizing buddy systems for state violated men through pro-male men’s centers.
All easy work to move an unwielding boulder of nonsense back toward the corner of those who foster such bad direction upon the public. Much of this can be done with the pen and limited personal involvement. But is not to be incumbant upon one man out of 10,000.

Want to see a hastier tortoise end to the things complained about and ridiculed here? Get out and get pro-actively (and non-violently) involved!

Let the femnists be known by their death threatening bomb scaring antics upon abortion ‘debates’ and upon legitimate social research professionals with the integrity for truth who publicly stand up to bring their carefully reviewed works forward for public benefit.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Opus July 8, 2012 at 09:58

@jaego

Although I am no great fan of the Red Sea Pedestrians (not that I have any personal complaints about them as I must say personally they have always been very charming to me) to impliedly blame them for the slave trade of the eighteenth and nineteenth century – a time when they were largely prevented from employoing their talents in such institutions as the law and the military and at a time when few thought that slavery was especially wrong, seems a bit much.

I am further surprised that the Romans (of all people) – and the Muslims – are credited by you with allowing them to control the supply of slaves. Rather surprised.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Cynical Youth July 8, 2012 at 10:19

@ jaego:

Don’t be stupid and read up on history. Whites may have abused and enslaved the other races for their own interests, but Whites of different countries absolutely hated each other.

Do we Americans forget how France and Spain among other nations were in a race with the Brits to colonize the new world? Do we Americans receive such poor education that we forget the French-Indian war (which was the catalyst for the punative taxation of the colonies that led to our civil war in the first place) as well as France supporting the colonies in the American Revolution in order to get back at the British?

Americans are pretty much the ONLY Westerners who entertain this dumb view that whites are this big ol’ happy family, probably due to America isolating itself from world affairs until post-WW2. You don’t get this crap from Europeans or even Canadians/Australians. Its just as naive of a view as multiculturalism…..scratch that, it IS multiculturalism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4
Keyster July 8, 2012 at 10:53

Want to see a hastier tortoise end to the things complained about and ridiculed here? Get out and get pro-actively (and non-violently) involved!

Used to be a few guys, like Zed, Anon 70, Elam, et al – – would send letters to newspapers and politicians, and every so often even get acknowledged. It was TEN’S of Men at work. Now there are hundreds, if not several thousand worldwide, including a smattering of women, that are shooting down Feminist rhetoric on the internet and launching E-mail letter campaigns and petitions to politicians.

It’s happening, slowly.
Numbers matter.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
universe July 8, 2012 at 11:42

Ralph
“Soldiers die in huge numbers in war. Look at WW1 and 2. There is no way for a population to replace those kind of demographic losses if the females of child bearing age are butchered.”
– No issue with you personally Ralph.
Let’s not forget the estimated 50 million once developing human beings murderously aborted to accomodate a “woman’s” right to choose a career to pay taxes and disrupt an entire nation for their own selfish ends over that of developing a family.
Fifty mill. is a sizeable demographic. The need to import replacements for the state sanctioned murder of its own citizens would also diminsh if population replenishment were really the crux.

The solution to limit the butchering of females of child bearing years would be attained if only feminist opportunists were to serve at the front lines. (Yes, I know, I know, there’s no such thing as a femnist in a fox-hole).
Femnists are the most likely to gestate only one point two potential future tax-payers, if any at all, resulting from their chosen delusion. No real loss.

Besides, years before our culture reached the stage of convenience, those who had influence in their culture were expected to serve as and within the military for the protection of others, those mainly working the land. Otherwise no ‘vote’, as rudimentary as it was during those times, unless one served their clan, borough, king, or nation militarily. Draft feminists only into the fray. They want(ed) the vote so they’ll have to work for it.
Segregate fem supremists from special luxurious treatments and from all others with female-only units so as not to endanger the real fighting men or any related operations.

Ponder this for a moment – fewer and fewer feminists translates into less and less unconstitutional state forced encroachment into the lives of all citizens (including the population replenishing unborn), less onerous unneccessary burden on the tax-base, a mass reduction in the unequal special double standards that are mandatory for any femnist, a return to productivity for the existing population, less dumbing down of the culture, restorative harmony between real men and women, and so on.

Come on all you feminist girls and political hacks. To the front lines go you. You asked for it now get to it. You’ll be working for much bigger things than yourselves for a change. But, you may have to come home in a body bag to prove it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
freebird July 8, 2012 at 11:44

I can see why the rad-fem are afraid of this talk,it makes sense.
Went to the blog listed at the top and came to the conclusion the guy is just ahead of this time for most of us.
Considering the recent FBI definition that makes it impossible for a woman to consent after one drink,hack even a traffic cop can’t tell if a person has had one drink.
This essentially criminalizes normal activity,and this fellow logically calls that out.
Go ahead. read the entire blog and see if you can find a single deception.
(Unlike “letters to a colleague”, or new deception definitions of criminal activity.)
This is the path to Soviet/Nazi style
“disappearaces” that come from the extension of unlimited police power.
It is right and just to oppose tyranny.
It is wrong to further it,futrelle.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
Anon July 8, 2012 at 12:10

Reading this thread, im reminded of a fundamental truth: Politics makes strange bedfellows.

Relevant corrolary: Interesting too that feminism has made such rich and varied enemies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
ralph gorman July 8, 2012 at 12:24

Universe is correct. It is entirely inconsistent to exempt women from combat duty to ensure future breeding capacity whil simultaneously allowing women to slaughter fifty million before they can come into the world. I remember watching John Stossel object to maternity leave only to have an attorney tell him that letting women make babies on the company’s time was “essential to the preservation of humanity”. Of course, this shyster did not say why the law allowed women to kill off the unborn if the survival of humanity was such a big deal.

As to women’s right to vote I will only say that if they had had to go to Belleau Wood as the price of the vote, they would be happy to remain disenfranchised.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
freebird July 8, 2012 at 12:24

Made the mistake of reading at boobz and goodmen.
Just a lot of gymnastic talking to justify stomping the feminist boot again and again unto mens necks.
Not a damn thing scholarly about that.
It’s a good thing these nutters are safely behind keyboards.

There is no question we as men need to quit debating these monsters in human guise and form alliances of our own.

The end result of not taking action is just the kind of action this post talks about.Drastic action in the face of powerlessness.Last resort of an underclass kinda action.
Sicko’s like boobz and sycophants need to NOT be condoned by polite society, as they foment violence more than any other factor.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
freebird July 8, 2012 at 12:42

I agree with you universe.
“Come on all you feminist girls and political hacks. To the front lines go you. You asked for it now get to it. You’ll be working for much bigger things than yourselves for a change.”

If they make it home after combat they will have a new perspective and have their heads out of the privileged asses.

These nutters conspire to “dismantle male privilege” whilst sitting on their privileged pussies doing nothing but attacking the men who made that possible for them.
This needs to stop before a woman can just point a finger and a man goes to jail.
Uhh no, we’re already there.
Yet they demand more and more,as pointed out by the author of the blog above,there will be no end to misandry,they will keep pushing until executions are legalized.
This sort of tyranny must be opposed before it gets that far,we’re already 2nd class citizens,and that has to stop.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6
Darryl X July 8, 2012 at 12:56

“Furthermore, those who are willing to unleash violence on others must be prepared to die themselves, and must lead by example. Somehow, I don’t think many of us have reached that point. It’s a long road to get there, and I hold out the hope that it will never go that far.”

An offense to one man is an offense to all.

After forty years of this bull shit, if you’re not there yet, you’re an idiot or a coward or both. Or you are benefiting from the system and you’re one of them.

I was their forty years ago.

Feminists have done considerable violence to millions of men like me already in the US alone.

They’ve kidnapped my children and enslaved me. I receive no benefits of living in a society to which I have made considerable sacrifices and contributions.

At the same time, the idiots won’t give me a passport and let me leave. It’s like an intimate partner relationship where your stupid girlfriend or wife picks a fight with you and corners you and won’t let you escape from it. What do you expect is going to happen?

Their violence is deliberate and self-serving and they have published their egregious motives and designs.

It’s way past time to answer that violence. It’s too late for me.

But it’s not too late for my children who are being indoctrinated and enslaved.

The only thing needed for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3
Darryl X July 8, 2012 at 12:59

Oh dammit. If the spooks are recording this, I better correct “their” (again) and make it “there”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
Ray Manta July 8, 2012 at 13:37

Ralph Gorman wrote:
You are kidding yourself. Soldiers die in huge numbers in war.

Not American soldiers, not anymore.

Look at WW1 and 2.

I noticed a downward trend for casualties. Source is Wikipedia.

WW1 – 117,465
WW2 – 418,500
Korean War – 36,940
Vietnam War – 58,269
Iraq War – 4,459

There is no way for a population to replace those kind of demographic losses if the females of child bearing age are butchered.

Do you really think female demographic losses from war are a burning issue with the numbers just shown? Not that I’m crazy about women in the military – they’re mostly making an ineffective institution even more ineffective these days.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Art Vandelay July 8, 2012 at 13:59

Fifty mill. is a sizeable demographic. The need to import replacements for the state sanctioned murder of its own citizens would also diminsh if population replenishment were really the crux.

Well a lot of them would have landed in prison anyways. We all know about the problems with single motherhood.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Andrew S. July 8, 2012 at 14:57

Futrelle is just looking for that pat on the head that so many men look for from women. He’s not going to get it because of his looks, never got it because he was good at sports, and he’s not a rich powerful guy. So with all the “disenfranchised” white middle class women in America Futrelle has found his avenue to get that pat on the head.

Also Mommy was probably a hard core feminist and told her little eating machine over and over how “special” he was anytime he brought home some paper he’d written about the patriarchy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
V10 July 8, 2012 at 15:12

The beauty of it for us MRA ‘terrorists’ is that we don’t have to DO anything. We don’t need to engage in suicide bombings or mass shootings or any other such nonsense to bring down the system. The system is already bringing itself down. Besides, a campaign of violence is more likely to strengthen our enemies’ resolve then break their spirit.

That is how we as individuals can win this war. No rallies. No lobbying. No criminal activity. No organizations to be subverted by Democrats or Republicans, infiltrated by agent provocateurs, or re-directed by white knights or white nationalists, all of whom are just looking for more cannon fodder. No formal associations to be mocked, then tracked, then outlawed.

All that is required of us is stop playing a rigged game. You help the cause just by looking out for your own personal self-interest, and laying plans for the inevitable collapse of the socioeconomic Ponzi. If you feel you need to do more, then talk to friends and family and encourage a few more pawns to walk off the board.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Darryl X July 8, 2012 at 17:03

@ V10 -

I understand your argument and am sympathetic and have certainly thought that way myself. Then I started thinking that our governments and women and feminists want us real men to drop out. They can transfer the wealth to themselves and sustain themselves for a considerable duration. Certainly through the end game of our global economic collapse. By pushing us to the margins of society and appropriating no benefits to us, then they have achieved the goal that they want. A primitive social organization with which they can satisfy their addiction to power and control. There are many benefits men like myself need, especially at my age, including health care. By being marginalized, I am being condemned to an early death after being a slave for my entire life. Your suggestion to stop playing a rigged game amounts to my conceding to death because all that I worked hard for was stolen from me and the social and legal and financial contracts I entered into were broken. You can’t just walk away. You can disengage some but not completely. Not even a young man. There will always be enough slaves, as inefficient as they may be, to sustain primitive social organization without real men. Real men comprise a sizable population but don’t use as many resources as women and feminists. The solution of feminists and women for maintaining their ridiculous standards of living are to throw all the real men under the bus. A may not be a perfect or moral or even practical solution, but it will work for them. If real men want to survive and benefit from living in society, then they will have to fight for that privileage. Living in social isolation without medical care and proper nutrition will not be very fulfilling. It’s more fulfilling to get rid of all the feminists and their primitive social organization and reinstitute civilization. And it can be done but it will take some work. Real men will just have to do some analysis and understand just how much they’ve paid into the system and how much they aren’t getting back and investing the necessary resources in taking it back and punishing those who stole it. That can’t be accomplished with our current political, legal, social and financial machine as they have been corrupted by feminists.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
The First Joe July 8, 2012 at 17:43

@ Art Vandelay – on the contrary there’s a very strong French conservative presence. Look at the showing of the Front National in recent elections. There’s another pretty successful party in France that’s basically called The Hunting, Fishing and Traditions Party – they have their own TV channel!

France is also (as far as my extensive research has found) the ONLY nation in the EU where you can legally buy a gun + ammo without needing anything more than proof of over-18 ID and residence in France – now admittedly that only applies to modern functioning replicas of antique black powder weapons e.g. the Colt Navy, or the Remington 1858… but even so that’s a pretty amazing level of gun freedom for Europe.

In contrast you need a pretty hard-to-get Firearms licence from the Police in the UK for those (yes, you can still have “front-stuffer” BP revolvers in the UK, or even ridiculous “long barrel” + welded on arm brace cartridge revolvers. As I say – only under licence).

Also: France – pepper spray and “tazers” are legal to own and carry… vs. UK – prohibited weapons.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
a_guy July 8, 2012 at 18:06

The reason that feminists (and the Left in general) love Islam and will not tolerate any discrimination against Muslims is because feminists and the rest of the Left hate Western Civilization with a passion, and they, correctly, see Islam as an ally in that hatred. That is why we have an intrusive TSA groping the hell out of small children and white grandmas in the airports, because the Left will not allow us to recognize that muslims have committed 99.99999% of the aircraft-related terrorism, and so we have to treat 80-year-old Norwegians the same as 25-year-old muslims in our airports. Feminists, of course, are too stupid and short-sighted to realize that if Islam were ever to take over, the feminists would be near-slaves wearing burkhas.

I see a few people on here hoping that Islam will step in and take care of the feminists for us, but that is incredibly naive to me. Islam is not just a religion – it is an entire political system. All you have to do is see how things are done in areas where Sharia law is implemented to see how life would be even for men. It would be a rigid police state. Trading Islam for feminism would just be trading one slave master for another. How about we restore Western Civilization to its full glory, kicking women back to their proper place as subordinates? How’s that for a lofty goal?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3
ralph gorman July 8, 2012 at 18:22

Ray:

I’m afraid you are arguing a non-issue. Why don’t you post the casualties of the German, French, Russian and Japanese populations of two world wars. Then, we will see if you stand by your position. Meanwhile, I whole heartedly agree that women have no business in the military just as they have no business voting, holding public office or having any job above waitress.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Ray Manta July 8, 2012 at 20:23

Ralph Gorman wrote:
I’m afraid you are arguing a non-issue.

Uh, no, Ralph, I’m afraid you are.

Why don’t you post the casualties of the German, French, Russian and Japanese populations of two world wars.

Because I consider your demand that I post numbers that support your own viewpoint (instead of my own) to be ridiculous. Do your own goddamn homework if you want to refute me.

WW2 is 2/3 of a century removed in time from us. Massed infantry and naval battles has given way to terrorism and asymmetrical guerrilla warfare. Those factors, plus the mechanization of warfare, have contributed to a downward trend in casualties.

I whole heartedly agree that women have no business in the military

Right. But “they’re too precious to sacrifice” argument (had validity in the early years of the 20th century) is an awfully weak one to make now. It’s every bit as absurd as demands that men give up their lifeboat seats in the Costa Concordia incident.

just as they have no business voting, holding public office or having any job above waitress.

Do you have any vision for implementing any of this beyond turning the US into a theocracy? My own belief is that technological, economic and social trends will combine to restore the balance of power in men’s favor in the 21st century.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Eric July 8, 2012 at 21:04

WalkinginHell:
Dr.Thomas Fleming is how he’s generally known. I’ve heard that he hates being called ‘Tommy’ so I use that all the time!

Fleming writes for Chronicles Magazine and has a blog that I think is now connected with the Daily Mail. He usually writes on socially conservative topics and a few months ago wrote a series of articles bashing men and referring to the Mens Movement as ‘jerks’ and ‘louts’ who ‘are always blaming women who are their victims’ &c. He’s constantly making excuses for women’s behavior, and blaming everything on men.

Basically this is the same refrain that Socon commentators like Sean Hannity and others go on when they talk about gender issues.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
Eric July 8, 2012 at 21:12

Jaego:
The problem with connecting race to the American culture is not so much biology as mathematics. The white race is going down in North America for one reason only: white women. Barring another huge influx of European immigration there is simply no ‘breeding stock’ available for white males other than non-white females. 99% of white American females are mentally and/or physically unfit either for marriage or motherhood.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Peter South July 8, 2012 at 21:28

The brown ones are scum also.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Gamerp4 July 9, 2012 at 06:24

I am a Muslim. I am confessing everything here right now so next time i wont be seen as an enemy of west or an enemy of MRA, i have long been an MRA (3 Years), I am a Black man having roots from Jamaica and settled with my grandfathers in Atlanta Georgia.

Now for the post the way i see it, is that both Anders & Eivind have preached violence which is not good because we as in MRA dont do that, remember RADFEM they preach violence on men and boys and we ridiculed them and even made their hatred public, so that next time they are viewed as they truly are “Violent, insane, psychotic, sexist & male haters” and if we take the same idea and just do the same rhetoric ideas then we are no different than those Radical feminist as we dont condemn violence from our side but we condemn violence from our enemy’s camp.

Now lastly Muslims here in United states are pretty much in the same line as other American men, as a Black man i have seen how i was treated by majority of Black women, how i was seen as nothing but a leech, freak, creep (Overall they were the biggest freaks themselves) but i never gave into it, the last i checked that feminists hate all men, not just American men, Have any of you read the Book by Maureen Daud “WHY THEY HATE US” in which she clearly states that ALL MUSLIM MEN ARE RAPISTS and OPPRESSORS of MUSLIM WOMEN (Resembles somethings? the same sentence was used by early feminists and even stands today), Have any of you seen Bernard Chapin’s new video on Feminism and how it sees muslim women and men if not watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXLOqsBdRPY&feature=g-user-u

Feminism is an ideology which just leeches itself on its host so that it can suck out the blood out of it and later take the form of its host to delude people so to make itself stand as a true form of EQUALITY, Western civilization has succumbed to it and now feminism wants to take over the world, look at India, Pakistan & Iran, there is a shoutout for feminism and there have been some forward laws to it, (Not in Iran & Pakistan but in India it is going in full throttle) look at Malaysia where recently a Muslim Conservative Feminist woman in parliament have stated that there should be a law where the state should force Muslim men to marry single mom and if they disagree they should be whipped 100 times (Seems Male Hating to me), Feminism shows itself as a victim ideology just to have doors opened for it and once the door is open it shows what it truly is, Muslims are opening those doors for it because they see it as an ideology which is to support women but in turn it is an ideology that goes against society (be it western, Muslim, or any other nation’s society).

My last take is I am a MRA and i support Men’s Right and it doesnt matter to me if a Muslim Women supports feminism, i will stand with My Christian, Mormom, Hindu, Jews & Muslim brothers and would do it by surpassing that Cold Muslim Bitch anytime. But we should shun all form of nationalistic and religious values to recognize eachother as brothers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
Eric July 9, 2012 at 12:20

Price & Ted:
I guess I spoke too soon about the ‘quotemining’. LOL All the talk about Futrelle’s ‘nervousness’ seems to have touched a nerve. Check out his article today for a good laugh.

Oh well. Gives him and the grrlz something to complain about besides soap-operas and daytime TV. LOLLLLLLL

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Ted July 9, 2012 at 15:47

“All the talk about Futrelle’s ‘nervousness’ seems to have touched a nerve.”

He’s rattled all right. At the end of his piece he nearly gives the game away when he asks:

“So does this mean that Berge is some sort of deep-cover feminist operative?”

Very likely, David. He attempts to recover with a large red flashing “sarcasm” sign, but us advanced conspiracy theorists are not fooled. Not fooled at all, David.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Ted July 9, 2012 at 15:50

PS one of his groupies has created a meme from your words:

http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3q10pd/

The only quibble I have is that “the wind” would be better as “his wind”. A point that another of his groupies made as well, sort of.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Eric July 9, 2012 at 16:20

Ted:
The groupie who created the meme was probably the either the same, or inspired by, the commenter who said:

‘David reminds me of my ex-boyfriend.’

Futrelle should pay very close attention to the ‘ex’ prefix and realize that most guys who try to please these bitches end up with the same prefix. I’m sure she has a more ‘exciting’ boyfriend now, just waiting for his parole board hearing…LOL

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Eric July 9, 2012 at 16:23

Ted:
As far as being rattled, yes he did give the game away LOL. It’s an old maxim that the first guy to put up hands and scream about his innocence is usually the guilty one.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
ralph gorman July 9, 2012 at 17:11

Ray:

You have your head up your ass. Right now the US is merely playing at war. If we ever get involved in a real one with say, Russia and China in the Middle East where hundreds of thousands of soldiers, even millions, are dying like flies, you will quickly perceive just how stupid your argument really is. Please don’t bore me with the bullshit that the nature of warfare has changed because of drones and high tech. It has not. The world is always full of idiots who think that reality has changed. It hasn’t – and never will.

I don’t need you to do my research. You know damn well what the casualties were in two world wars – and what the demographic consequences would be of transforming those numbers into dead females of child bearing age. And here is one for your shit-for-brain to ponder. Raise cattle and sent the cows to the slaughterhouse instead of the steers. You’ll be out of business in short order. Now dip your “brain” in an ink bottle.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Firepower July 9, 2012 at 19:23

Certainly, terror attacks work, but operational secrecy is paramount. This means that threatening to kill people openly and loudly is essentially worthless. Either you operate out in the open honestly, eschewing illegal tactics, or you operate in the shadows as a murderous killer, like our intelligence agencies

Good points to remember…

And do not forget Ho Chi Minh was successful against several well-armed western nations. Many wrote books on how they did it, so reinventing the wheel in a blog forge is unnecessary.

If Thomas Jefferson is applauded for saying “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from…” LIUFY

YOU can be applauded as well. It works for Al Sharpton.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
joeb July 9, 2012 at 21:41

I wonder if Health and human services thinks that economics strangling a male en till he freezes to death in his car on a cold Ohio night is Murder .
or the Guy who sleeps in a tent in back of the steel mill , I wonder if they think of that as a violent act .
How many of you all have been days without eating or have taking a cool shower because the gas was off .
What goes throw the Child’s mind when Dads sleeping in his car while Mom rides around in her new Truck .
These are the things that drive men off the edge , I have seen them all and much worse .
Sticks and stones , sticks and stones .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Ray Manta July 10, 2012 at 07:59

Ralph Gorman wrote:
You have your head up your ass. Right now the US is merely playing at war.

That it is. It’s awesome job security for Halliburton execs. I imagine their lobbyists are doing quite well too.

If we ever get involved in a real one with say, Russia and China in the Middle East where hundreds of thousands of soldiers, even millions, are dying like flies,

Russia’s population is imploding and they simply don’t have the warm bodies to do it. China’s one-child policy had guaranteed that any war where soldiers are “dying like flies” will be politically unpopular.

Please don’t bore me with the bullshit that the nature of warfare has changed because of drones and high tech. It has not.

Really? Please explain then why our current conflict in Iraq has an order of magnitude fewer casualties than the Vietnam conflict.

The world is always full of idiots who think that reality has changed. It hasn’t – and never will.

I guess then that such phenomena as the Industrial Revolution, nuclear technology, and advances in communications and automation are just figments of my imagination. For battlefield effectiveness, we should really be brushing up on our sword skills. And let’s just ignore developments such as mechanized landmine clearance and remotely-controlled drones. After all, nothing ever changes, right?

You know damn well what the casualties were in two world wars

One which ended almost 70 years ago, and another almost a century ago. The world has moved on. You should do the same.

and what the demographic consequences would be of transforming those numbers into dead females of child bearing age.

The Black Plague wiped out half of Europe’s population 600-something years ago. Yet here we are in the modern era, posting to a blog on the Internet. Amazing, isn’t it? Closer to the present, we had the Influenza pandemic in 1918, which may have killed as many as 50 million people worldwide. And the Chinese Great Leap Forward of 1958-61 left 30 million or more dead. Yet these terrible tragedies have barely made a mark on our collective consciousness, despite their incredible numbers (rivaling the two world wars) and their involving both sexes.

And here is one for your shit-for-brain to ponder. Raise cattle and sent the cows to the slaughterhouse instead of the steers. You’ll be out of business in short order

We aren’t cows dumbo. Men have economic value far beyond their status as potential sperm donors. And it’s my understanding that the fate of most cattle (male or female) is the slaughterhouse. The females simply take longer to make the trip than most of the males.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
ray gorman July 10, 2012 at 13:40

Mr. Manta persists in displaying his stupidity to the world. Let us take two examples. One population of 100 kills off all but one of the males while leaving fifty females. The other population kills off all the females but one while leaving fifty males. Which population shall reproduce and recover faster?

Simple arithmetic is beyond Mr. Manta.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Ray Manta July 10, 2012 at 15:18

Ralph Gorman wrote:
Mr. Manta persists in displaying his stupidity to the world.

While apparently Mr. Gorman persists in living in his own Never-Never Land.

Let us take two examples. One population of 100 kills off all but one of the males while leaving fifty females. The other population kills off all the females but one while leaving fifty males. Which population shall reproduce and recover faster?

And just where does this population live? Your scenario of the mostly female population recovering more rapidly only works if they live in a Garden of Eden with no external threats. But if they live in the real world (as opposed to the never-never land you inhabit), that mostly female population is subject to dangers such as predators, invasion from neighboring tribes, natural disasters, and depletion of resources.
These are all things that women have needed men to deal with throughout our species’ history. If there weren’t enough men to protect them, the entire tribe either died out or was assimilated by another.

Simple arithmetic is beyond Mr. Manta.

Sure it is. Now please explain why you had to come up with such a contrived example. Could it possibly be because of how flimsy your arguments are? Nah, it just couldn’t be ;-) .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
The Whammer July 10, 2012 at 22:50

I think that Berge’s problem was just one of sexual frustration which you may have noticed is a big problem for a lot of men on these blogs. He wasn’t some activist just some poor sex starved guy who was one blow job away from being a feminist himself. You’ll notice that when he got a “girlfriend” who I believe is the same girl who would comment under the name “Emma the Emmo” that his attitude changed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Ray Manta July 11, 2012 at 06:08

The Whammer wrote:
You’ll notice that when he got a “girlfriend” who I believe is the same girl who would comment under the name “Emma the Emmo” that his attitude changed.

He may have calmed down somewhat but his message was still the same. That’s why he got arrested. His last piece was on Anders Breivik, which is quite some time after he acquired his girlfriend.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
ray gorman July 11, 2012 at 09:33

Mr. Manta isoff in his own fantasy world. I gave him the real life example of the the three Roman disasters culminating at Cannae where the Romans lost all their manpower and had to grow bck the dead manpower. He still has not explained how the Romans would have been able to do this if they had lost all the females of child bearing age. Read some history of the real world, Mr. Mantra. The idiocy is all yours.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Ray Manta July 11, 2012 at 11:03

R. Gorman wrote:
Mr. Manta isoff in his own fantasy world.

Sure it is Ray, or is it Ralph? Your sudden name change sure is confusing.

I gave him the real life example of the the three Roman disasters culminating at Cannae where the Romans lost all their manpower and had to grow bck the dead manpower.

You didn’t give *me* that example, you gave it in response to someone else. I didn’t post in this topic until later.

The Wikipedia entry states that the Romans lost approximately a fifth of their manpower between Cannae and the associated battles. So even with one of the greatest military disasters in history ancient Rome was far from completely decimated with respect to its male population.

He still has not explained how the Romans would have been able to do this if they had lost all the females of child bearing age. Read some history of the real world, Mr. Mantra.

I’ve read plenty already, thank you. Historically, men who were short women resorted to the following tactics:

(1) Raiding for women
(2) Abducting/kidnapping women
(3) Trading for women

In other words, female reproductive capacity is a commodity whose value can rise or fall. Sort of like wheat or barley. Certainly important, but not irreplaceable.

The idiocy is all yours.

Whatever Ralphie-baby, or whatever you’re now calling yourself. My impression is that you’re a sore loser who isn’t man enough to admit he’s getting his clock cleaned in this debate.

I’m not real clear as to why you’re still arguing with me. I don’t have any problem with your position that women should be kept out of military combat. But you act all butthurt because I disagreed with your position that it should be because of women’s reproductive capacity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
ray gorman July 11, 2012 at 15:26

Ray:

The plug is up your ass, not mine.

There are all kinds of good reasons to keep women out of the military indeed, reprodutive capacity and demographics only being one of them. As for your denial of the obvious, that is something only you are too stupid to perceive. And as to Roman losses of manpower in battle, is Wikipedia counting fifty year old men and ten year old boys in its figures? I hate to be such a stickler for details but, as it is your habit, not mine, I tought you should pay your usual attention to such matters.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
Ray Manta July 11, 2012 at 16:32

R. Gorman wrote:
The plug is up your ass, not mine.

You’re very good at projection. You’re so good at it you sound just like a woman.

As for your denial of the obvious,

And what exactly is this denial? My conclusion is pretty straightforward – women’s reproductive capacity is a fungible, replaceable commodity. What specific examples of demographic collapse can you show me that happened due to a shortage of women?
I’ve listed several examples where females were decimated in numbers approximately equal to males such as the 1918 Flu Pandemic and the Great Leap Forward. Yet those numbers were rapidly replaced. So it appears that losing females of reproductive age in similar numbers to males isn’t the disaster you’re making it out to be.

that is something only you are too stupid to perceive.

You remind me of the way Y2K doom-prophet Paul Milne wrote just before Jan 1, 2000. Everyone else was too “stupid” to see things his way. Then the fateful day came and went, and they all got to point and laugh at him (I sure did).

And as to Roman losses of manpower in battle, is Wikipedia counting fifty year old men and ten year old boys in its figures?

17 and up, according to the article. That includes seniors, but ancient times weren’t a very good time to be a doddering oldster in a wheelchair. My simple deduction is that most of those remaining in that demographic were able-bodied, fit men since those that weren’t generally died soon. If you have statistics to the contrary, please post them.

I hate to be such a stickler for details but, as it is your habit, not mine, I tought you should pay your usual attention to such matters.

Details and hard evidence are what carry an argument, not statements such as “you have your head up your ass”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Rage July 11, 2012 at 21:40

@Eric

I’m the one who made that post, though you are incorrectly guessing that I also made the meme– I didn’t. I believe another “groupie” posted it. The ex is still a good friend of mine. He is with a new partner and just had a son. I am happily married to a wonderful man. See, life carries on without you. Stick your heads out of your gopher hole, the air out here is sweet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Eric July 11, 2012 at 22:37

Rage:
Well, if Futrelle is a specimen of your tastes in men, I can well imagine what the new ‘Prince Charming’ must be like…

Sure he’s ‘hawt’ though, LOL.

As for the ‘ex’ and his new ‘partner’: mark my words, he’ll be an ‘ex’ again in short order, with alimony and child-support payments to boot. Then, he might think the ‘gopher-hole’ doesn’t look so bad…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Ted July 11, 2012 at 22:59

“the air out here is sweet.”

Provided the wind is in the right direction.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: