Because Daniel is a gay man who lives in Norway, he has a valuable perspective on the political interplay between feminism and gay activism. He’s also honest, which is rare in the US, and has even taken women’s studies classes.
Daniel left the following comment on my earlier article on Nordic men, and I think it’s worth highlighting, so I’m reposting it for the benefit of readers:
[...]
I presume you already have understood that the womens movement and the gay movement are closely linked. How so? The way I see it, is because they happened fairly simultaneously. You have perhaps heard of the “Stonewall riots” in 1969. This is considered to be the catalyst of the modern gay movement. Feminists and homosexuals quickly realised the benefits in supporting each other on the issue. They both needed a suitable antagonist. For the women the antagonist was the man, and for the [homo]sexuals the antagonist was the heterosexual. If you combine the two, you get the straight man! The perfect target for the combined movements, and the perfect link. Because when you think about it – there is really no logical reason for homosexuals and women to “team up”. In nature, they should also be antagonists. To me personally, the gay movement stand out as the righteous one, whereas the womens movement is based on the false notion that women too were opressed. Well, women never went to jail or were considered to be mentally ill because of being women, were they?
Anyway, because of the above mentioned link, AND THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND, you can probably expect that the majority of gay men and close to a hundred percent of lesbian women, consider themselves to be feminists. Personally I view “my kind” as brainwashed. In most universities LGBT courses are a part of women`s studies. And yes, I have also attended these courses. But please don`t write me off just yet… Whereas I do see that feminism certainly has contributed to making it alot easier for me as a gay man to be who I am today without feeling harassed, I do not make the same mistake as many of my homosexual brothers and sisters in believing we have feminism to thank for our privileged position. It was gays themselves who fought this battle, not feminists.
In women`s studies one is taught that both gender and sexuality is a social construct, and can be torn down if we push hard enough. I do not believe this for a second. I do however believe that we socially enforce the differences that are naturally there. And here the subject of this excellent article comes to mind. You Americans ask if the Nordic men are manginas. Well, during my – so far – two visits to the United States I noticed that you American men are very conservatively dressed. It seemed to me, that after a man turns 20, he starts dressing like his father. There is no difference any more. Actually, in general, I have the impression that Americans – and particularly the men – are very much afraid to be “different”. You all looked the same! This is dangerous. I have also heard stories about how this starts early, already in your colleges. The “nerds” can`t sit down at the same table as the “footballers”, and the two can not be seen communicating in public. This is dangerous. Don`t restrict yourselves and your fellow men like this. If you do, then feminsim have certainly won, in that women can be anything, whereas a man can only be a man, and preferably only one kind of a man. And this is one of the major differences between American men and Norwegian men. As I stated in my ranting yesterday, I don`t feel uncomfortable making contact with other kinds of men. One of my best friends is a hunter. Another is a prison guard. They are both happily married to women. They sometimes come with me to gay bars. I sometimes take care of their children. It doesn`t make them “manginas”.
Unfortunately, my visits to the US were too short to befriend any of you American men and to understand how you think. I would very much like to. My observations are therefore mostly visual. I did befriend our hotel clerk – Brian – talking to him whenever I could and he was available. He seemed to me to be very straight and very open minded. I hope that goes for most of you
So, I will stop my ranting now, with an important message to you. If you didn`t fall asleep already then please pay attention:
The feminist movement is bigger than ever, and growing. Both feminist and gay institutions receive millions of dollars in state benefits. The universities educate “professional” feminists each year, who need to find work within their field. The feminist wheels need to keep turning, to employ them. It is a very lucrative business! And it will never stop.
Dear straight men, you can bend over backwards trying to please these people. You can trolley your infants 24/7. You can cook all the meals at home and do all the cleaning. You can give all your top corporate positions to women. You can select gay presidents for the next hundred years. You can submit to them totally. BUT IT WON`T HELP!!! They will just keep pursuing their agenda. The “business” has become too lucrative to stop. I know it, because I know how these people think. I am a part of them.
So please set your foot down now! Before it is too late. Stand up for yourself, and your right to be an important and appreciated part of our common society. Don`t hesitate, and don`t think you have to give in even an inch! Because you don`t.
You have my vote
{ 75 comments… read them below or add one }
” It was gays themselves who fought this battle, not feminists.”
While I don’t dispute this, I will say that it reflects a certain way of looking at things.
However, if we assume that everyone has their own specific problems, and that without the assistance of others without those problems then they are stuck with dealing with their problems on their own, then another perspective emerges.
There can be no doubt that the social climate for gays and women has improved markedly over the last 50 years. Some of the most vocal proponents of their interests are straight men – all the way up to the presidents and prime ministers.
On the other hand, no-one is doing much to vocalise the interests of men, other than men talking privately to men.
As I look at the large gains made by women and gays over the last 50 years, and the losses men have endured at the same time, I do not so much marvel at the feminists and gay activists who ‘won’ these advantages, but at the seemingly unique ability of men to side with and promote the interests of those unlike themselves. I suppose it is only natural that men should have this ability in spades – it is what fatherhood is all about.
Ethnic, women, queer – “studies” all fall under the same banner of “Humanities” – promoting victimology and deconstructing hetero-normative “privilaged” white male hedgomony. Although there are internal social divisions, this keeps them united politically under the Democrat Party “big tent” umbrella.
The GOP represents the traditional, laissez-faire Capitalist of individualism, self-reliance and responsibility. Democrats represent the collective of women, minorities, gays, guilty white progressive men that enable their victimhood mentality and government enforced social and economic equality with hetero-normative privilaged white men.
The NAACP, LaRaza, CAIR and GLADD (among dozens of other politically active Democrat supported grievance groups), are hand-in-glove with N.O.W. and the plethora of liberal women’s groups that lie beneath her.
Men’s Rights Activists are a small group of obstreperous internet bloggers and vloggers, many of whom are proudly and defiantly Apolitical or reformed liberals, (or liberal except for the feminism part).
“Because when you think about it – there is really no logical reason for homosexuals and women to “team up”. In nature, they should also be antagonists. To me personally, the gay movement stand out as the righteous one, whereas the womens movement is based on the false notion that women too were opressed. ”
I agree with him that women are NOT oppressed. Women are not even remotely oppressed.
As far as men who have sex with men are concerned, sexual orientation is a PERMUTATION. A person is born a virgin (usually, but not always, HIV-negative), remains HIV-negative before legal age (unless said person contracts HIV through breast milk, a blood transfusion or sexual assault or consensual sex), and then goes on to have a PERMUTATION of sexual activity, or no sex at all, until the person dies.
As far as the level of oppression experienced by men who have sex with men, the highest levels of oppression are found in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Mauritania, and northern Nigeria, where such sex is grounds for capital punishment.
The second highest level of oppression experienced by men who have sex with men would be in Myanmar, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Uganda, Tanzania, Sierra Leone and other countries where such sex acts would lead to a life sentence in prison.
The third highest level of oppression would be the countries where the same type of sex act would yield a prison sentence shorter than the remainder of the man’s life.
The reason why I use permutation is because sexual activity occurs along the time continuum and is cumulative in nature. Chronological order matters, as does legal climate and attitudes of the geographical location in question, as does use (or lack thereof) of condoms, as does whether the sexual partners are concurrent or in a series, as does fidelity (or lack thereof).
So while I agree with Daniel that gay men are oppressed, granted far more so in northern Nigeria than in Norway, and while I also agree that women do NOT deserve protection under the law that they currently receive because, after all, we do not send them to death row for having two X chromosomes (and let’s face it, we know women have androcidal fantasies; it’s no secret), Daniel will have to make a more cogent argument for additional protection for gay men because what he wants protection for is a permutation.
Hello guys
Thank you for your comments. Piercedhead: straight men have supported the gay rights movement in the same way a mother gives milk to a crying baby. They have done the same with women. They have comforted both gays and women; “there there, stop crying, we will give you your rights”.
What is happening today is that the baby is still crying, even after it has been fed gallons of milk. It is obviously not crying because of hunger anymore, so it must be ill, and needs to be taken to the doctor.
This can be projected on to the gay and womens movements. They have been given all the rights, and are still crying. Today the feminist baby is ill, and must be taken to the doctor.
I personally am very grateful to straight men. No straight man has ever given me a hard time because I am gay, instead they have supported me and I feel privileged (like I also stated above).
But make no mistake about it – the baby would never have been fed if it hadn`t started crying. At least not until a much later stage, and at a slower pace. This is what I meant when saying “gays have fought this battle themselves”.
Hi Daniel! I`M also Norwegian. I`M leaving you a link to a Norwegian MRA blog where I left linkes to other Norwegian blogs that are sympathetic to the MRA cause. I`m trying to make these people talk to each other and get more people to read them.
http://manndom.blogspot.no/2013/02/slik-diskrimineres-menn.html#comment-form
Geographybee…. something something
I am not crying anymore. My comment was not a plea for more rights for gays. Either you have misunderstood my message, or I have been vague (I am sorry, English is not my first language).
Saying that gay men are “oppressed” is extremely misleading.
First, it assumes that gay men are some kind of distinct race of people, where a white gay man is a different race from white straight men and women. This is not the case at all. Gay men are just men.
Second, this misleading outlook takes the idea of gay men as a separate race and decides that any disapproval is because of this “racial difference”. This is complete nonsense, but from a strategic point of view, it is easy to see why they did this.
The civil rights movement in the US was a very powerful, necessary and effective movement to achieve equality under the law for black people (an ACTUAL separate racial category). Those who wished to push acceptance of homosexuality, as well as those who wished to push feminism, saw the success of the civil rights movement and decided to copy its methods. The first step was to portray homosexuals as a separate racial group in order to use the civil rights model.
However, homosexuality is not a racial classification. It does not make a participant distinct from his own race. It is a BEHAVIOR, and it is the BEHAVIOR that warrants the disapproval. In every country that outlaws homosexuality, they are not allowing those people as human beings (as blacks were in the US and SA); they are outlawing the BEHAVIOR, and with good reason. There may exist a percentage of gay men who behave sexually in a controlled, responsible way, but, inevitably, acceptance of homosexual behavior leads to rampant promiscuity and breakdown of social mores, which then affect the health of society at large, both morally and physically.
Additionally, homosexuals tend to prefer their own, so when they gain power, they promote others of the same sexual proclivities to the positions beneath them (eheh) to the exclusion of others. One need only look at the damage homosexuals have done to the Catholic Church, where many seminaries are essentially gay bathhouses, to understand how this dynamic plays out.
Also, the propagation of sexually-transmitted disease explodes where homosexuality is rampant. Right now, the newly anti-biotic-resistant strains of syphilis and gonorrhea, as well as other diseases like AIDS and Hepatitis C and D, are largely the result of the sexual behavior of gay men, but these diseases will find their way to everyone eventually.
The heavy-handed promotion of “gay marriage” is another inevitable result of acceptance of homosexuality. You’ll notice that when the “gay rights movement” started, it was merely about “ending oppression” and has since become about upending society in general to submit to every demand of the homosexual community, including reforming ages-old foundational institutions. While marriage was suffering terribly already from things like no-fault divorce and feminism in general, those things were mere pin pricks compared to the stake through the heart that “gay marriage” will be to the core unit of society – the nuclear family. Our society will not survive long after this final stage is complete. We only have to look at ancient Rome to understand where we’re going.
Homosexuality is a fringe element of human behavior and should be kept that way, not brought to the forefront and celebrated. Gay men may not think that is fair, but life ain’t fair, and only those who deal with reality rather than fantasy will survive in the long run.
@ Daniel
I agree with you that women are not oppressed.
However, I also consider sexual orientation to be a permutation of sexual activity where the person whose sexual orientation is in question has sex with other people in a particular order, and that sexual orientation is not an immutable characteristic, such as race, ethnicity, place of birth, date of birth, or biological sex. “Immutable” is the English word that means “not capable of being changed” or “not variable or changing”.
In English, “combination” is when the order does not matter and “permutation” is when the order does matter. So if Robert has sex first with Mary, then with Jane, then with Louise, that is one permutation of sexual activity out of six possible permutations of the three women. If order does not matter, there is only one combination.
A guy
Women are not an “own race” either, but hey have their own movement. So do the gays. And they are powerful.
And while you are debating whether or not gays are “us” or “them”, and no matter how much you personally think they are entitled to “rights” or “a movement”, their power and influence grow, and are ready to walk all over you if you don`t focus on the real issue here.
So … exactly how many gay men supported gay rights, when gay men only make up 3-5% of the population … ?
Gay rights, along with women votes, along with lesbian supremacists dominating universities … all paid for by the military & government & pushed by the media
Its all a massive brainwashing campaign, nothing more nothing less …
There arent enough gays or transgendered morons dicing their penis’s off to actually have rights in the first place
Look at the statistics, the vast majority of women DIDNT want women to have the vote, & the vast majority of women didnt want feminism
Basically because there werent enough lesbians or man hating activists, to push anything through
It has ALWAYS been the military & the government pushing all this crap through, & covering up the dissemination by mass spreads through the controlled media
To Make It Look Like A Movement
REAL Gays & lesbian supremacist activists, have NEVER had the funds or organisation to make into mainstream
You guys have to realise, its the government & your military, who betrayed you, theyre responsible for destroying your families
Gay activists & these so called feminists are the front, they are the excuse
Viking
As you understand I sympathize with your cause. However, as I socially stand to a great extent under feminist influence, taking the step to become a more obvious mens rights activist is like swearing in church and I can pretty much say goodbye to about 80% of my gay and female friends, so it is not a decision to be taken lightly.
But I will have a look at your blog and perhaps get back to you
I am Nordic but I am not Gay.
Found inscribed on an old Irish stone : “Lord, Protect Us From the Wrath of the Gay Norsemen!”
What Daniel appears to be saying is that there is not much actual gaiety amongst Lesbians.
After gay marriage is legalized federally by the Supreme Court, they won’t stop there. The next front is work place discrimination as enforced by the EEOC.
Disparate impact studies will be done to prove homosexuals are discriminated against, and quotas (federal hiring “guidelines” will be established much like for gender and race today). You will see a box to check in job applications for Straight or LBGT. Companies will be required to hire based on “local representation” of gays vs. straights in the surrounding community. The competition among large companies for black or hispanic lesbian females will be fierce.
Time Magazine or the NYTimes will have feature articles like “The Rise of LBGT Power in America”, celebrating courageous ground breakers like Ellen, David Geffen and Barney Frank.
Homosexuality will be considered hip and normal behavoir, everyone will try it. Heterosexuality will be considered square and passe, especially marriage and “breeding” children. There may even be legislation passed to make “Gay Liberation Day” a federal holiday, on perhaps every June 28th in remembrance of the brave rioters that fought for gay rights at Stonewall.
Seeing men holding hands, hugging and kissing in public will be common. They won’t stop until the world is a Gay Utopia, like a global expansion of the Castro District in San Francisco. If you publicly disagree with them at anytime, you’ll be labeled a homophobe or hater and banished from the club of hip and cool elites.
I’m not so sure about that. Truly widespread homosexual behavior only happens when women are off-limits, as in Afghanistan and Iran (sodomy might as well be a national sport in Iran — Ahmedinejad was lying through his teeth about the “we don’t have gays” thing), and prison of course.
Somebody in the comments above states : Take aim at the real enemy …
A military trained to kill you & a government deliberately designed to create a people of serfs & wage slaves
The government is the Economic Arm of the military
Which is why all law is based on contract & admirality law …
For all of those thinking gays are natural or evolve as some sort of stark mutation
How much propoganda does it take to slice your own breasts off ?
How much propoganda does it take to slice off your own penis & your balls off?
& then the YEARS of agonising pain & mutilations & complications, as your brutally mutilated body tries to heal itself
Instead of giving gays the treatments & mental care to form natural heterosexual families, we prevent them from reproducing …
No, inserting your penis in another mans fecal encrusted, anal opening, is far important then the families & children these men, SHOULD RIGHTLY HAVE
NEVER underestimate the SICK lies & propoganda pushed by your military & government
What kind of sick person tells mentally ill people its ok to chop their penis & balls off?
YOUR government
Families are the number one competing military force, for the military & government
ALL families are potential standing armies, ready to take arms against the military
Which is WHY theyre targetting your families & using the mentally ill, ie lesbian supremacists & gays, to destroy your rights, as a family
Make no doubt, it is ALL about destroying your RIGHT TO HAVE A FAMILY, thats why we have lesbian supremacists & gays being pushed
It’s all about so you dont have REAL legacies, history & culture & traditions
THIS is how War-time propoganda is waged against you
EVERY evil is justified, even to the point of slicing off your breasts, & your penis & balls
As long you dont reproduce & raise HEALTHY & NORMAL families able to grow in political power & fight back
REMEMBER, its not about gay rights
Its about convincing them not to raise normal heterosexual families, THATS WHAT GAY RIGHTS ARE REALLY ABOUT
It’s not about trannie rights …
Its about convincing them to slice their own penis’s & balls off & endure years of brutalising agony & pain, so they never raise heterosexual families
IF YOU’RE GAY, Realise exactly whats being taken from you, the ability to raise your children with a woman
Gay rights is ALL about destroying you as a person, so you dont recover, so you dont become the man & father & husband to a wife, & a home filled with YOUR children
THATS whats being taken from you, by the gay rights activists
REMEMBER its not a right, if those rights are taken from you
These gay rights activists arent activists, theyre destroy your right to be hetrosexual activists …
Black is white, white is black, gay rights is Doublethink for destroying your ability to marry & procreate with a female
“Additionally, homosexuals tend to prefer their own, so when they gain power, they promote others of the same sexual proclivities to the positions beneath them (eheh) to the exclusion of others. One need only look at the damage homosexuals have done to the Catholic Church, where many seminaries are essentially gay bathhouses, to understand how this dynamic plays out.”
It’s normal to favor your own. Everybody does it. And that is how communities build wealth. The Jews tend to promote other Jews. People like to be around people that reminds them of themselves.
“First, it assumes that gay men are some kind of distinct race of people, where a white gay man is a different race from white straight men and women. This is not the case at all. Gay men are just men.”
Homosexuals and Heterosexual have different life stories. They have different psychological development histories so they’ll tend to view things differently. They been through different things. So being gay isn’t just about behavior, it’s about one’s psyche, personal history, and background.
Still, you can’t get away from the fact that male homosexuality, entails the insertion of men’s erect penises into other men’s anuses/rectums.
Male homosexuality axiomatically means sodomy/buggery.
For all their political bluster, even gays/faggots admit THIS aspect of the lifestyle to be psychologically, biologically and hygienically problematic.
I’m not so sure about that. Truly widespread homosexual behavior only happens when women are off-limits, as in Afghanistan and Iran (sodomy might as well be a national sport in Iran — Ahmedinejad was lying through his teeth about the “we don’t have gays” thing), and prison of course.
That isn’t a very relative comparison, as their history and religious culture are so different. The goal of the Gay Agenda is to normalize homosexuality, to destigmatize it as something to not be ashamed of, but rather proud of. Faggot is the new “N-word”.
Women in combat was never considered 40 years ago either.
Don’t underestimate the secular-progressive left.
They own academia and the media, and are close to owning the government too, (and they do in several states and cities).
It’s the on-going effort of cultural Marxists to tear down society from within by destroying the nuclear family and creating an egalitarian proletariat from which to lord over. They’re succeeding one generation at a time.
Men must learn to develop themselves independent of women.
No marriage.
No joint property.
No cohabitation.
No monogamy.
No charitable donations.
“Women and men are equal”
“Women are liberated”
Yes: then men are liberated to. Liberated from the obligatoin to support women or to have their time, assets, liberty and energy transferred to females.
Young men must be taught to develop themselves, go their own way, work out and stay heathy, travel the world, and consider a child via surrogacy in their prime 40′s after they have made and hidden their stack.
“We celebrate diversity: LGTG, Gay, Bi, Curious, Questioning”
Thank you: please now add HOOMS: single, polyamormous, unattached males practicing “hands off of my stack”
Charity is just another sinecure for wimmins who don’t want to produce in the real world, and who are looking to snag a wealth snag and live the remainder of their lives shopping and bitching without accountability or consequences. Masculine charity (true charity) is undertaken on an individual and anonymous bases.
Starve the feminist beast. Walk away. Worship and devote yourselves to yourselves.
At “aguy” Perfectly said “Homosexuality is a fringe element of human behavior and should be kept that way, not brought to the forefront and celebrated.” Given the fact that male homosexuals can only be known to be male homosexuals if they want to be, why do they so feel the need to publicize their sexual preferences? Heterosexual men who enjoy sodomizing their wives or girl friends normally do not advertise the fact. Why would they?
I’m with Elmer , . Not Gay don’t understand or feel no need to sympathize nor do I feel like the MRA needs Gay men around .
What part of Men’s right movement is lost .
Maybe we can call it Men that will procreate on there own terms movement .
Or is that’s so hard to understand .This gay rights garbage is just the feminist trying to say all MRA’s are gay . Would they love it if we just hand that right to them .
I’m just thinking we are getting closer and closer to violence with every word Uttered . I feel my Honor has been insulted as of late . Im sure Im not the only one .
Has anybody been to the pubs lately its on fire with anarchy talk . Next the Government will make it Illegal For men gather in the pubs .
Im done Im all for violence . Danial right there just going to keep pushing there agenda no matter how sensible the opposition may be .
@Daniel
I’m well aware that the gay lobby is powerful and growing, and will destroy me and the rest of this county if we don’t start saying “no”. That was the entire point of my earlier post.
The first thing one has to do, however, in order to solve a problem, is identify the cause of the problem. The main problem here is that the pro-”gay rights” people have been pushing acceptance of homosexual behavior as a normal, natural, healthy thing, and that disapproval of homosexual behavior is a crime. We need to first recognize that homosexual behavior is unnatural and unhealthy behavior, both for the practitioners and society at large. We need to stop buying into the propaganda pushing this crap and feel free to criticize it. Then we need to kick the pro-gay movement right in the balls.
“So please set your foot down now! Before it is too late. Stand up for yourself, and your right to be an important and appreciated part of our common society.”
Sure that’s what you want. You can’t possibly bear to imagine what it would be like to have to acknowledge the overwhelming contribution heterosexual males have made to society. You make it sound like we are invited to participate in your society instead of showing us the gratitude extended to you in allowing you to participate in ours, no matter how limited. There is nothing common about our society.
“Don`t hesitate, and don`t think you have to give in even an inch! Because you don`t.
You have my vote”
So we do all the work. How about you chip in or are you trying to play both sides. “I was with you all along don’t you see” mentality.
So much of what you write is a direct insight into how different your mindset is. Such as: ” You all looked the same! This is dangerous.”
Dangerous? How? Must be a sign of obsequiousness and conformism right? Oh the horror! Next thing they’ll all be wearing brown shirts.
Methinks you live in a bubble world and you know at any moment it will burst.
@ ….Jensen March 2, 2013 at 15:01 I could agree with you statement more, or even add an improvement. Most males would live happier lives, if they could ditch the needy little boy syndrome built into the average adult mans psych by a life time of listening to, and watching un-questionably, the induced pop culture music and its accompaning souless lullibies of lyrics telling you that you’re somehow incomplete, as males, unless you want to be wanted…need to be needed…luv to be loved…just so goddamned co-dependently-klingy and inter-dependent on everything and everybody else…but themselves. Vomitingly-discusting…manly,yes… but un-male.like.
It has been evident since its very beginning that what feminism has argued for women has been equality on matters where inequality existed AND preservation and expansion of special privilege where it could be gained. Homosexual women have argued for their rights through the feminist bullhorn as a matter of convenience or perhaps belief that since feminism is a female movement and since they are females their fight naturally falls under the feminist umbrella. However, I have NEVER seen or heard of homosexual man taking this same position for themselves. Every argument I have seen from gay men has been simply for treatment equal to that of hetero males, nothing more (despite those rights of straight males being less than what feminists have acquired for women).
I have no problems with gay men beyond perhaps their being tied up with feminists who IMO really only use them as leverage and footsoldier headcount rather than really being concerned about the rights of gay men. For sure, we can see the feminist veil of concern for gay males drop with one of their favorite shaming tactics of calling straight males “gay” for resisting feminist hegemony. Their (recently) overt demonstration of hostility to transsexuals as not being “real” women and therefore being unable to understand “what it’s like,” is another drop of the veil of professed tolerance exposing more of that exploitative purpose.
I have long suspected that gay men and Feminism is just a short-term coalition. Once federally recognized, gay men won’t need to put up with Feminist bullshit either at least not as much. The stereotype of effeminate gay men is just that; a stereotype. A former college classmate came out and shared with me that the gay crowd he hung around with referred to women as “fish;” not exactly complimentary.
When I share my family court experiences with him his stock reply is “Glad I’m Gay.”
Once secure that the discrimination they face for their sexual orientations is diminishing they will start to focus on being men and rail against the feminist state. Afterall, once us heterosexual white males are thouroghly beaten down, the Fems will look to other men. To think that gay men are not aware of this is folly. Every one of the gay men I have associated with resent (some quietly) having to support the neverending supply train of tax-payer dollars going to provide women with more pubicly funded “options.” Remember, gay couples are having families too. The hoops that one must go through to adopt in this day and age are astonishing. Just think of resentment that some of them must have regarding women who use abortion as means of birth-control.
At “aguy” Perfectly said “Homosexuality is a fringe element of human behavior and should be kept that way, not brought to the forefront and celebrated.” Given the fact that male homosexuals can only be known to be male homosexuals if they want to be, why do they so feel the need to publicize their sexual preferences? Heterosexual men who enjoy sodomizing their wives or girl friends normally do not advertise the fact. Why would they? And, if they did let everyone at work know of their perverted habit like homosexuals do, they would be terminated and possibly prosecuted.
Keyster wrote – “The GOP represents the traditional, laissez-faire Capitalist of individualism, self-reliance and responsibility. ”
Except when they roll over and vote for VAWA apparently.
@Jensen: “Men must learn to develop themselves independent of women.
No marriage.
No joint property.
No cohabitation.
No monogamy.
No charitable donations.”
You forgot a couple: no kids, and possibly no sex (with women) too, since the moment a man puts his penis in a woman’s vagina, he forfeits most, if not all, of his civil rights. That’s arguably worse than the outcome of most male-male sex.
Although historically it has been in society’s interests to suppress homosexual behavior, right now the calculus is swinging the other way.
Sex with other men, porn, and sex dolls, are becoming the least damaging ways to indulge one’s sexuality. For those so inclined, I say go for it.
But Daniel is wrong in thinking that standing up now will do much good. The point of no return is in the rear-view mirror. The majority of men go along to get along, and this will not change.
Hello guys
I can see my comment stirred up alot of views, which is good. I see a very mixed bland of thoughts and attitudes here, pretty much covering the whole spectre from support for gay rights, via mere acceptance to more hostile views, and even an outcry for violence, so it is hard for me to know where to start.
I have to admit that some of the prejudices and connections aired here are unusual to me. One or two commenters have connected homosexuality with sodomy… I don`t think I have seen the two brought up in the same debate in 20 years. Just saying I am not used to debating with Americans, and the differences in culture are obvious and might influence the debate. To put things in perspective homosexuality in Norway was criminal by law until 1972, and already in 1993 gay couples could marry. A time span of only 21 years between two such extremes is very short and perhaps explains how fast things have changed over here. In the US I know you are currently debating whether or not gays should be allowed to marry, while over here it has been common for 20 years. No offense – I am not saying “we are better than you” – merely trying to figure out the slightly different levels of debating. I do know that religion and conservatism has a stronger hold on Americans than Norwegians. Anyway, I appreciate you expressing your views without the PC filter and am up for the challenge.
As for the sodomy part, I think we just have to accept that consentual sex between two adults is not sodomy. Otherwise it is hard to bring the debate up to the next level. That some of you think of men having sex with other men as disgusting is another issue, but doesn`t make it sodomistic.
The overall extreme focus on sex also kind of keeps the wheels spinning in the same spot, without any progress. To me being gay means I am able to love another man from the bottom of my heart, and not just the bottom of my anus. Yes – able – the word meaning I don`t look at another man as a potential rival or competitor. I see a person I would very much like to connect to. To care for, and have him care for me. I want to mentally please him. This affects my tone of voice, the words I use and my facial expression (and no, it does not mean hitting on every man). When the men I talk to realise my approach is not one of competition, they incredibly often lay down their guard and relax. As I am not a very big person, this also reduces any threat my presence might pose on another man. The effect is astounding and makes me think how hard it must be to be a straight man – always prepared for “attack”.
This question made me want to perform an experiment. I am a nurse, and decided to let myself hire in a prison, as a prison nurse. I wanted to see what effect my slightly effeminate character had on an extremely macho environment, as this was a high security prison with only male prisoners. Oh yes, I was afraid in the start. Afraid I would be ridiculed or even attacked walking freely among these men who mostly were doing time for violent criminality. But nothing happened. In the start I got some strange looks. But after a while the inmates were happy to see me, and in private they would open up and talk about anything that bothered them (which of course was part of my job description, as a nurse). My homosexuality, which of course influences my personality, disarmed them.
This is my nature as a gay man, and my “duty” – the way I see it, to use my ability to love men, to bring down their guard and see them as human beings and not as competitors or “threats”. Sex? As the years go by it is reduced to only a minor part of my homosexual identity. And this goes for many gays.
Of course – flashing sexuality in parades, wearing leather costumes or hardly anything at all – doesn`t help their cause much. I fully understand that such behaviour produces prejudice, and makes bystanders think of homosexuality as pervert. It is not my style and I would never take part in such a parade. But hey, gay guys are just as different as straight guys.
(I will have to post my answer in portions, as it is a long one).
@Daniel
“Sodomy” in the US is just another word for non-vaginal sex — usually anal sex. It has negative implications to Christians, obviously, but otherwise it’s just the old way to say gay sex. As for the anger, you have to keep in mind that the US is a very aggressive society — on both sides of every issue. Gay pride parades in US cities are not just guys in leather and cross-dressers; they are often outright obscene and provocative to ordinary people (e.g. giant dildos everywhere, simulated or real sex on floats, full frontal male nudity which is alarming on an instinctive level), hence the reaction. I call it “straight-baiting,” and I’m entirely convinced that it was intended to provoke the opposition. This is why you’ll see some straight people lose their cool over the gay thing. I used to get upset over it myself, especially when I was a teen and I’d get harassed in the neighborhood I grew up in, which ended up becoming the center of gay culture in the entire Pacific Northwest. I’m not sure Europeans quite understand how far people take things here. You’d have to see it for yourself to understand. It has calmed down a bit over the last twenty years, but man, you should have seen it back in the 90s. It was like a middle finger in the face of conventional society.
This is why I think things went a lot smoother in Scandinavia. It wasn’t nearly so aggressive and provocative. Gays weren’t trying to “attack” the majority culture. There’s a much more compromise oriented culture, whereas we have an adversarial culture.
I am privileged. My experience in the prison, and with straight men in general has made me grow as a person.
Many gay men unfortunately don`t experience this. The truth is, many are afraid of straight men, having been bullied in their youth. So they seek refuge in the one ideology that embrace them the most; feminism.
This further estranges and alienates them from straight men, as they through feminism get their beliefs confirmed; straight men are truly the enemy. Indoctrination? Sure. But it doesn`t happen “out of the blue”.
To make things worse, many gay men never really get to know straight men. Most of them flee to the cities as soon as they reach adulthood. In the cities the gay culture is large enough for them to live their lives in a “gay bubble” – they surround themselves with only gay friends. And in the largest cities, there are even gay quarters, where you can do your shopping in gay shops, go to a gay doctor, and even a gay lawyer. All your neighbours are gay and also the council is gay. So how can gay and straight men meet? It is a difficult dichotomy.
But another truth is, that inside every gay man – no matter how old – is a little boy who just wants to be accepted and loved by his father. And this is projected on to every straight man he meets. He is curious, wants to make contact, but is held back by ambivalent feelings of fear, inferiority and the lesson he learns from feminism; hate.
A commenter here wrote
“First, it assumes that gay men are some kind of distinct race of people, where a white gay man is a different race from white straight men and women. This is not the case at all. Gay men are just men.”
The above quote is actually a should-be-dream for most gay men. They just want to blend in with the rest! If this was the common view among society, I don`t think gay rights activism would ever emerge.
However, as explained above, it is still only a dream. Gay men do feel different. Even those who were never bullied, grew up with a sensation of “I am not like everybody else”, observing among their friends, in television and all around, that the rest of the world is heterosexual. Not so much anymore, but gay men in their prime today grew up in the 80`s and 90`s when things were different, and it will affect them always. Also, like in the USA, most Norwegian gay men have been born and bred in small towns, and it is not until their view on the world had pretty much cemented itself, that they could move to more gay-friendly environments.
Then of course you have another – although smaller – group of gay men; the ones with conflicting gender identity. These men see themselves as women and identify with women. They don`t want to blend in with other men, and oppose the connection. To them, feminism is also an inviting ideology.
Then you have the last group. The straight-acting gays. They blend easily in with the rest of community, and to them there is no “us” or “them”, they have no problem identifying with straight men, and have no interest in the gay community. They feel no need for feminsm! They were perhaps footballers in college, or have a military career behind them. You don`t see them as gay, and this actually works against them. This group has the hardest time outing themselves, because society doesn`t expect it. So many simply don`t. They stay single, or even marry women and have children. But they are terribly unhappy. The luckiest become what we call “late bloomers”.
Mr. Price, thank you for pointing things out to me. As i wrote, I suspect cultural difference plays a part in this debate. I still hope I come across with a little sense
BREAKING!! Australian Politician Ann Bressington Exposes Agenda 21 & Club of Rome
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEPk4kBacWM&list=HL1362313053&feature=mh_lolz
Feminsim. Gay rights. LBGT. Destruction of the hetro male and his family.
Watch the video. Connect the dots guys.
“The feminist movement is bigger than ever, and growing. Both feminist and gay institutions receive millions of dollars in state benefits. The universities educate “professional” feminists each year, who need to find work within their field. The feminist wheels need to keep turning, to employ them. It is a very lucrative business! And it will never stop.”
Going Galt or Ghost/MGTOW, voting for people like Ron Paul and the so called libertarian or better constitutionalist (women vote revoked) may be a good start. If we kill the government Golden Goose they won’t be able to support the feminist tyranny anymore.
You seem to forget the huge amount of debt and the financial decline/recession will end all the liberals BS programs, the rise cost of energy and it’s scarcity will end also the fest. Nearly all societal “progress” and women lib movement was done because we have a cheap source of energy: mainly oil !
Ok, moving on – without writing a book – I will try to comment my views on some of your comments. Some of them were directed to me, and some it seems were more open.
joeb wrote
“nor do I feel the MRA needs gay men around”
The way I see it, MRA really doesn`t have much influence yet, and you need all the supporters you can get. Not a time to be picky and choosy. What does it matter if a supporter is gay, as long as he is loyal?
A guy
“We need to first recognize that homosexual behaviour is unnatural and unhealthy behaviour”
You may think so personally, but I don`t think getting stuck with this view will do anything for progress. Homosexuality has always been around. Just because it includes a minority, doesn`t make it unnatural. It would be the same as saying “being a United States citizen is natural (300 million people), being Norwegian is unnatural (5 million people).
The unhealthy part is largely due to the way society has treated homosexuals. Many homosexuals are mentally ill, but it is not because of their sexuality. Things are better now, but as I wrote earlier, what happened 20-30 years ago still sticks around in the mind of the person who lived it.
I think we have to accept that homosexuality has come to stay. It is the POWER that is given to their movement, that is out of proportion and harming straight men.
Rmaxd
“So excactly how many gay men supported gay rights, when gay men only make up 3-5% of the population?”
“Real gay and lesbian supremacist activists have never had the funds or organisation to make it into mainstream”
“If you`re gay, realise exactly whats being taken from you, the ability to raise your children with a woman”
I suspect all gay men supported gay rights at a time when it was sorely needed. Today, I think there are quite many of us thinking it is going overboard.
As for the number of gays, the documentation is wildly inconsistent. The highest estimates come – not unsurprisingly – from feminism and queer studies. Personally I think the number is not the issue here – homosexuality is here. Period. It is the damage they can inflict that is important. Never underestimate the influence of a group, just because they are a minority. Who in 1938 would think that nazi-Germany (60 million at the time) had the capacity to overrun Europe (500 million)? They almost succeeded.
Even a smaller number can have a devastating influence lobbying their cause, and GATHERING! And this is an important one. 5% can easily overrun the other 95%, if the 5% are loyal, while the 95% are confused and internally in disagreement.
As for the funds, the gay movement doesn`t need money to finance itself, because it is using your money!
And for the last one, it is pretty obvious that gay men don`t realise they are being deprived of women and a family, because they DON`T WANT women. It is why they are gay!
All the next quotes are from ThingY
“You can`t possibly bear to imagine what it would be like to have to acknowledge the overwhelming contribution heterosexual males have made to society”
I do acknowledge it very much. It doesn`t come well enough across in the comment that Mr. Price chose to highlight. But if you read my first comment under the “Are Nordic men really manginas?” article, it does. I do appreciate the contribution of straight men. A LOT!
“You make it sound like we are invited to participate in your society instead of showing us the gratitude extended to you in allowing you to participate in ours, no matter how limited. There is nothing common about our society”
Actually, it is. It is neither “my” nor “your” society. Heterosexuals and homosexuals have always shared the same society. Gays are nothing new. They were always there, side by side with heterosexuals. As for the “gratitude” you can see my comment further up, about the “feminist baby”. As a homosexual I expect to be treated as a full member of society, nothing more and nothing less. I don`t need special rights or benefits, and I don`t need to be “allowed” to be such a member, I demand it!
“So we do all the work. How about you chip in or are you trying to play both sides?”
Please understand, that I was under feminist influence for many years as a young adult. Waking up from one indoctrined “reality” to a new one takes time. I am trying to find my footing, and starting to “chip in” by making my views public, like I do here. As for you doing “all the work” I think you should have a look around at your fellow straight men. If they would invest 10% of the time they spend attending to sports, to MRA, the battle would already be won. To me it seems a little far fetched to put the responsibility of defending straight mens rights on a gay guy. But I symphatize with your cause and I support you my way, and will continue to do so.
“So much of what you write is a direct insight into how different your mind set is”
Exactly. We are different. You and I are, and straight and gay men are. What I would very much like – and work for – is a bit more connection and understanding between the two, to bring down the alienation.
“Dangerous? How? Must be a sign of obsequiousness and conformism right? Oh the horror! Next thing they`ll all be wearing brown shirts”
I think it is damaging for men in general and the MRA cause specifically, that men have such a small space into which they can outfold their masculinity. It must feel like a corset! Yes – here I do agree with my feministic teaching. Do you yourself think it is fair, that women can be almost anything – and get hyped for it, while men are socially constricted into a much smaller field? That if a woman chooses to go into the army it is “girl power”, but if a man wants to be a caretaker, he risks facing ridicule? I have observed, that the expectations society put on a straight man are sky high! His choices are actually very limited in life. He doesn`t have to move much, before he falls out of that expectation box. Whereas a woman can do pretty much what she wants, and it is ok. Well, in my opinion, it is not.
I think men are largely responsible for this social restriction on themselves. It seems to me, that men have social codes – meant for men, and enforced by men – to keep each other in place. Many gays have certainly experienced the consequences of not following this code. The “mangina” debate is a perfect example. “Betrayer of men”. I bet, the first kind of man that springs to mind when you hear the word “mangina” is a male feminist. Ok. But are male feminists large in numbers, and powerful?
I think the real “manginas” are the ones restricting other men, enforcing consequences on any man who does not conform to their identity of a man. I think two men fighting each other over a woman are manginas (feminists certainly loves this!). I think army recruiters bullying other men into the draft – knowing that they may very well get killed – are manginas. I think male judges inflicting harder sentences on men than on women (for the same crime) are manginas. I think the male crew on the Titanic who enforced “no men in the lifeboats” are manginas. The list goes on and on. The real betrayers of men, they have always been here, and have probably mostly been heterosexual. And they are the real reason why MRA is having such a hard time expanding; they simply don`t care about other men! Men are rivals and competitors, and with a “with less men around, there will be more pussy for me” mentality. They have a hard time showing solidarity with other men, and would instinctively attack the man if they saw a man and woman argue. Betrayers of men. There you have them. The gay guy is not the “mangina” you have to worry about. He would probably love you (if you let him) not betray you.
“Me thinks you live in a bubble world and you know at any moment it will burst”
Well actually, I was kind of hoping it will. If you actually read what I write, you would understand this.
I fully understand what Daniel here is trying to say and I’d like to applaud his efforts here. Yes, homosexuals are individuals just like any other, sexuality is not the only constitute of their identities anymore than it is for a straight man. The problem is the notion of the Western ‘gay’ identity which reduces individuals to the some of their sexual preferences. It is about time more gays spoke out against the ‘gay movement’ and being lumped in with lesbians who have very little in common with most gay men.
As for what constitutes being a man, that is a different issue. The question was very eloquently tackled by Jack Donovan. I feel that it is ultimately the English language that is at fault by describing every adult male human as a man. There should be a defined example cont..
Of what constitutes the basic definition of a man (see Jack Donovan and other writers) and it should be left up to the individual male to decide on whether he aspires to be a man or not.
Personally I do not believe in movements but I believe language will have a powerful impact on the way we think. We should use the word ‘faggot’ to refer to attention whores with a duplicitous entitlement victim mentality irrelevant of whether they are gay or straight and we should use it to shame them. It is a good way to rebel against the PC Marxist culture and it would be good if homosexual men were to use it too.
>>The way I see it, MRA really doesn`t have much influence yet, and you need all the supporters you can get. Not a time to be picky and choosy.
Yes, it is a time to be picky and choosy. I have been at this a very long time, Daniel. Public activism starting 1978. When you let women into a MRA or FRA group, it almost instantly becomes a woman’s organization. And, when you let gays into an MRA or FRA organization it almost instantly becomes a gay organization. It does not work, and men are forced out or sidelined. In fact, when I see women or gays on men’s boards, based on past experience, I assume it is an attempt to shut it down.
>>I think we have to accept that homosexuality has come to stay.
No, we do not. Homosexuality came to stay in the last days of the Roman Empire, too. In fact, homosexuality and feminism came to stay in that last days of all major civilizations. Which is exactly why those civilizations no longer exist. A society can only be strong and powerful when there is patriarchy.
You think we have no influence. Assuming only for argument sake that is correct (it is not) why are you here? Out of the kindness of your heart to make us strong and powerful?
Ghandi said first they ignore you; then they laugh at you; then they attack you; then you win.
Over my 34 years as a public activist; they ignored us; then they laughed at us; now they are attacking us, and very soon we win. Which is why you are here. Because we are indeed influential, and we can’t have that.
In fact, MRA’s are scaring the crap out of a lot of people. If you don’t know that, it’s because the MSM refuses to cover the MRM. Yet, you certainly found the Spearhead fast enough.
Keyster wrote – “The GOP represents the traditional, laissez-faire Capitalist of individualism, self-reliance and responsibility. ”
Except when they roll over and vote for VAWA apparently.
It passed by a 286-138 margin. All 138 votes against reauthorizing VAWA came from Republicans. Obama’s strategy to divide and conquer the majority Republican House and turn it Democrat in 2014, slowly comes to fruition.
If more Men’s Rights activists were actually ACTIVE in supporting those Republicans that voted against it, perhaps we’d have some influence. But they’d rather piss and moan that Republicans aren’t doing enough to stop feminist pork, because that’s easier.
How exactly do you propose they battle “The Party of Women”?
Maybe articulate a “Men’s/Father’s Rights” platform?
Yeah right, that’ll work.
Don’t worry the GOP will be the minority party for years to come as we spiral into economic collapse, like Detroit and California.
Daniel makes some good points, but they are about himself and only true for a small group of Homosexuals. Most feel very different from us and will take all the power they can – and alot of power is being offered them by the New World Order. Why? Because they hate normal life for one thing. Many of them are Gay or worse. And also they want to lower the population and herd us all intot he cities as per Agenda 21. So families aren’t what they want, but rather isolated individuals. Homosexuality is perfect for this.
Homosexuality normal and healthy? In the Netherlands, among the most liberal cultures in the world, drug addiction and suicide are still far higher among Gays.
Homosexual is a new category. When a Muslim says they don’t have them, he may be speaking the truth as he understands it. All men are under heavy pressure to marry in Islam. If he can function with a woman and give her children and provide for her and them, well what more can be asked? What he does in his own time is his own business. If he likes Men, well so what? Islam is very conflicted on this. The Koran condemns this behavior and at the same time talks about “immortal cub bearers” in heaven. In other words, it will be alright up there. Anyway a compromise has been reached: don’t ask, don’t tell. Do what you want behind closed doors with other men or boys.
Anonymous age 70
MRA can`t afford to alienate itself with potential supporters either. I understand that 35 years with war on feminism can make one a bit paranoid. But let`s not forget that is just what it is; a war on feminism – the ideology, and not on women and gays themselves. Some women and gays do not support feminism, and some men will also not support MRA. So to me, it is not “men versus women (and gays)”. I am sorry you on the other hand, seem to see it that way.
I can assure you, I am not here with a hidden agenda. I am not here to infiltrate anything. Actually I do not know much about American MRA. In Norway, it is barely born. So I am curious. I guess that is why I am here. I am also not here because I feel men will “win” anytime soon, and want to be on the right side at the right moment. I am not Sweden in WW2 who up to 1942 (when it still seemed like Germany could win the war) refused to let Norwegian refugees over their border, but then suddenly opened up after the German defeat at Stalingrad. However I hope and believe that feminism one day will show itself in its true color, and the emperor will walk the streets without clothes, for everyone to see.
But of course, I will not try to push myself in anywhere where I am not welcome. You have my support anyway. I am not one of those women or gays who feel entitled to break into any “boys club”, or else it is discrimination. I perfectly understand that you need to have this one for yourself. You deserve it. Again, I support you anyway.
You are wrong about homosexuality though. You can oppress it again, but it will always resurface. Because, unlike feminism, homosexuality is a constant. You straight people give birth to us every day. And yes, even you have to accept it.
>>MRA can`t afford to alienate itself with potential supporters either.
You do not have a clue. Many men who participate in MRA boards make the same mistake. They think we are supposed to make some big organization, and carry signs, and lobby legislators and thus establish power. This has never worked and will never work. There are simply more women voters than male voters, so we lose and lose and lose. And, thus it will always be.
The admin on DGM-4 has studied, and on men’s boards, such as this and DGM-4, there are several thousand readers for each person who actually comments. The real men’s movement is, one man at a time, men changing their lives to avoid the worst of problems facing men in a system they cannot change, now or never. That is where our opponents are being hurt, and they think if they attack the men’s boards and forums they will stop the hurt. Stats below.
>>Actually I do not know much about American MRA.
That is apparent. So, why do you reject everything everyone with significant experience tells you? So far, you have told us all we are doing wrong, plus what we should do, all from a person who then admits he knows nothing about the US movement. That doesn’t fly anywhere, but especially not on Spearhead.
Here is where the hurt comes from the men’s movement, all with no real organization, one man at a time. It is called swallowing the red pill, apparently derived from a movie plot. No leaders to assassinate or toss in jail on trumped up charges, which is why the panic and why people like you come here to stop us.
Number of Marriages per 1,000
Unmarried Women Age 15 and
Older, by Year, United States:
1922 99 (found on Web)
1960 73.5
1961 72.2
1962 71.2
1963 73.4
1964 74.6
1965 75.0
1966 75.6
1967 76.4
1968 79.1
1969 80.0
1970 76.5
1972 77.9
1975 66.9
1977 63.6
1980 61.4
1983 59.9
1985 56.2
1987 55.7
1990 54.5
1991 54.2
1992 53.3
1993 52.3
1995 50.8
2000 46.5
2004 39.9
2007 39.2 (Rutgers 2009)
2008 37.4 (Rutgers 2009)
2009 36 (UVA 2010; project moved from Rutgers)
2010 32.9 State of our unions data, UVA
Women are hurting, because after 15 years of promiscuity, when they get baby rabies, they can’t find a husband. Law firms are unable to advance their annucal profitability because men who don’t marry also don’t divorce. Men who drop out don’t pay taxes. Someone, a man who moved overseas, told me in recent years up to a million men a year have expatted.
By the way, in UK the number is around 18. In NZ it is 28.
>>You are wrong about homosexuality though.
I don’t think so. Open practice of homosexuality tends to be closely linked to matriarchal societies. When feminism goes away, so do gay rights. Yes, there will be private practice at all times in all societies. But, you won’t have gay marriages. Nor will you have Gay Day at Disney, with little kids exposed to male gays with plastic penises hanging off their shirts.
In 1960, when I graduated from high school, gays were coming out. And, their plea was, whose business is it what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms. That actually makes sense to most of us.
As soon as private practice of homosexuality was legalized, it no longer was a matter of privacy in their bedrooms. It was major lawsuits against Boy Scouts, demanding the right to openly teach Boy Scouts their lifestyle.
And, little kids were forced to read HEATHER HAS TWO MOMMIES.
What percentage of the US is gay or lesbian?
“In surveys conducted in 2002 and 2011, pollsters at Gallup found that members of the American public massively overestimated how many people are gay or lesbian. In 2002, a quarter of those surveyed guessed upwards of a quarter of Americans were gay or lesbian (or “homosexual,” the third option given). By 2011, that misperception had only grown, with more than a third of those surveyed now guessing that more than 25 percent of Americans are gay or lesbian. Women and young adults were most likely to provide high estimates, approximating that 30 percent of the population is gay. Overall, “U.S. adults, on average, estimate that 25 percent of Americans are gay or lesbian,” Gallup found. Only 4 percent of all those surveyed in 2011 and about 8 percent of those surveyed in 2002 correctly guessed that fewer than 5 percent of Americans identify as gay or lesbian…
“Contemporary research in a less homophobic environment has counterintuitively resulted in lower estimates rather than higher ones. The Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, a gay and lesbian think tank, released a study in April 2011 estimating based on its research that just 1.7 percent of Americans between 18 and 44 identify as gay or lesbian, while another 1.8 percent — predominantly women — identify as bisexual. Far from underestimating the ranks of gay people because of homophobia, these figures included a substantial number of people who remained deeply closeted, such as a quarter of the bisexuals. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey of women between 22 and 44 that questioned more than 13,500 respondents between 2006 and 2008 found very similar numbers: Only 1 percent of the women identified themselves as gay, while 4 percent identified as bisexual.”
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/americans-have-no-idea-how-few-gay-people-there-are/257753/
MAN UP!
Anonymous 70 : thank you
Gay men and straight men aren’t all that different. Like most gay men, I grew up among straight guys–family, friends, classmates, etc. And my life story is pretty much the same as the stories of the guys I grew up with. I played on football and baseball leagues with my brother, and ran cross country and track in school. All my friends and relatives were straight. Now as an adult, most of my close friends are pretty typical guys. You wouldn’t pick them out of a lineup as being gay. Despite what you’ve been told, we don’t lounge around with our Sex and the City-style female bffs drinking appletinis and talking about shoes and how men have done us wrong–we don’t really hang out with women at all in fact. We do pretty ordinary stuff like work out, play video games, swim on the local master’s team, and sit around at home watching shows like Walking Dead and Game of Thrones. Pretty standard stuff. I think the stereotype is that gays are essentially feminine not masculine. For example, that when we go to the movies we all like chick flicks, arty indie films, and female empowerment fantasies. But almost all the guys I know prefer action movies, comedies, and sci-fi. Thelma and Louise? Not so much. The Avengers Vs. Thelma and Louise? Now that might be fun to watch.
Society has become thoroughly anti-male because of feminism, and gay guys have been targeted in many ways too, just not in all the same ways straight guys have. Feminists hate all men–not just the straight ones. As you know, some of the most belligerent members of the feminist ranks are lesbians, and they hate gay guys at least as much as they hate straight guys–especially the GMWs. They think we’re…wait for it…privileged. And…wait for it again…misogynists. Lesbian feminists are always going on about “women-hating fags” and ranting about male privilege. And we don’t really like them either. So I’m gay, but I feel no real affinity with feminists or feminisms. I don’t care about their issues and I don’t fall for their BS.
Feminists have been trying to force their vision of emasculated male identity onto gay men just like they’ve done to straight men. They’ve used the bludgeon of political correctness and the complicit media to paint an offensive and inaccurate picture of us, just as they’ve done to you. Look at the gays on TV for some examples. They’re all screaming queens and neutered submissive losers, and they all spout Oprah-esque feminist tropes nonstop in support of their female friends. These caricatures are as buffoonish and insulting as the portrayals of straight men. Unfortunately, that’s the only version of gay men that most straight men see, so they think we’re a bunch of eunuchs who’re best pals with the feminists and other eternally aggrieved whiners. Straight men think we all support feminists in their anti-male crusade, but we don’t. And I think they also believe that gay guys have somehow been given a pass in the war on men, but we haven’t been. I think all this misinformation is a strategy to separate groups of potential allies and pit them against each other so they don’t join forces.
One big example is that we deal with a lot of the same stuff in the workplace. My style of communication is the standard male variety–direct and to the point. I’ve gotten in trouble recently because a lazy female software engineer (yeah, I know) has been trying to get the team I lead to do her work for her under the guise of increased efficiency. I’ve had to shut her down a few times when she’s come to my desk ranting about it. (She just had a baby, so she’s extra crazy.) Last time she came by I just cut her off mid-meltdown and told her the conversation was over and turned my back to her. What else are you going to do with that? Of course she ran and tattled to her manager, making stuff up and saying that I’d made her feel “threatened.” She spread it around the office and now I’ve been told that I have “communication issues” and that I’m “angry” and “hostile.” All because I said no to a hysterical woman. My brother had something kind of similar happen to him a while back, and we’ve talked about it a lot, sharing advice and lessons learned to deal with these things smarter in the future. So who’s side in the gender war do you think I’m on? I think more and more gay guys are over the lesbians and feminists.
“… while 4 percent identified as bisexual.”
If someone can convincingly show me that less than 2/3 of American woman under 45 do not have significant sexual experience with other females, I’ll eat my computer.
Anonymous age 70
I am not here to try to stop you! Please believe me. Even if I wanted to, I couldn`t.
I am here because I see the increasing political damage done to straight men. My experience is from Norway, but I see many similarities to what is happening in the U.S.
I see a trend where typical female criminal behavior is decriminalized (like shoplifting), while dominant male behavior is criminalised (an example is from 2009, when a law was passed making buying sex criminal, but not selling).
I see a lot of young fathers taking care of their children, on a scale that would be considered science fiction 30 years ago. But are they rewarded for their efforts? No. After a divorce, the mother still gets to keep the children in 95% of the cases.
Then you have another law, enforcing that at least 40% of the board of any stately owned corporation must be women.
Then you have means health issues. Although Norwegian men today live longer than ever, women still outlive them by five years. The suicide rate – I think it is something like 3 men for every woman over here. Still, most of the gender specific funding, and public attention, is channeled to womens health.
Then of course you have the draft. After 40 years of feminism still only men are drafted. Women are certainly capable of serving in most military positions. They don`t have to however, simply because they are women. Men are supposed to serve, women are supposed to rule.
I know this all sounds familiar to you and you have heard it a thousand times.
In my view, it is wrong, wrong, wrong.
The list can be much longer, but I don`t know how much I have to
write to convince you I am on your side. Yes, I would like to convince you. I could just ignore you, but you seem to me to be a wise man with a lot of experience (even if I disagree on certain issues), and an effort to understand each other can get the MRA moving, even across national borders.
If you think I am “telling you what to do” then you are seeing ghosts in daylight. Then you are reading everything I write with your “who is this impostor” glasses. I can`t do anything about that. But you have to remember, that even if you are an experienced MRA yourself, my bet is that a lot of the readers of “The spearhead” are new to all of this. They never had a mens activist thought in their lives. Until perhaps they were hit by the feminist hammer in one way or the other, and are waking up. At least – as having worked with gender issues in general for 10 years, I think I have at least something to contribute.
Even if you are a well experienced MRA, it is a mistake on your part to try and “brush off” the up and coming next generation of MRAs, just because they think differently than you. Because in most cases, they will. They will however be willing pupils if you teach them, instead of intimidating them.
Me? I am learning already. And I appreciate the thoughts and figures you are putting in the time to leave me with.
Which brings me to something – and here, you actually will have reason to believe I am “telling you what to do” – but please just regard it as my take on the issue.
As a former women`s studies student I kind of have an idea of what makes the feminist beast ticking.
Men are rational beings. They fight their battle on feminism with reason, figures and statistics. Everyone knows that feminism manipulate numbers to
pursue its agenda. Men fight back with pointing at these numbers and emphasizing that they don`t add up, thinking that by doing that, they have won the battle.
Since when did that ever work?
I think it was Gloria Steinem who once wrote that every year, a 150,000 girls in the U.S. alone died of anorexia. Christina Hoff Summers found the numbers shocking, and contacted some professor to get the numbers confirmed. The reply was that “no”, with annual variations, the true number reported is less than a hundred on average each year. But it was too late. The 150,000 had already made its way into college textbooks.
Let`s face it. The average student in women`s studies` classes is not the most intelligent one. The grades they need to obtain a degree is in the lower part. To them, 2 plus 2 simply doesn`t make 4. They honestly don`t see how feminism is harming men. Take for instance affirmative action in the above mentioned corporations. If you tell one of these girls that replacing a man in the corporate boards with a woman, is damaging to the man, their answer would typically be “but he can find another top position”. These girls honestly believe that feminism is the best thing for everybody, and while there are malicious feminists who only want to hurt men, many of these girls never had androcidal thoughts and actually believe that feminism is also beneficial for men. They are easily influenced by feminist professors, and it is their firm belief and easy indoctrination that makes them blindly pursue this ideology.
So, when fighting feminism with reason and numbers doesn`t work, it is because feminism is an emotionally driven ideology. To make it short; until men get angry, frustrated or depressed enough (and many enough), to fight feminism on the feminists own terms, I think men will have a hard time pushing things through. And last but not least – and this is a tricky one – I think men also have to claim a little victimhood for themselves. Feminists have played this card for ages now, and it still works. Victimization is very hard for men, because it is highly unmanly. Still, I think men need to swallow their pride a bit and play this card too. God knows, they have plenty of arguments for using it by now.
Anonymous age 70
As for the gay issue, I doubt there are more true homosexuals than 3-5% of the population. And as I already have stated, the power given to them is out of proportions. It is going overboard. I do not support this, I simply want my basic rights as a full member of society. I am not a gay activist.
Can we at least agree on this?
I see opression of homosexuals in the past as hazing. In a group you are always hazed if you are weak or different. Nerds get picked at in high school, if you dont fight back in prison you are doomed etc.
You could easily make homosexuality lawful, BUT enforce citizenship and all those other virtues you guys seem to care about.
But when goverment starts to enforce rules it gets really bad every time.
Thus the best thing for a homosexual to do is to man up, hazing usually stops when you prove yourself.
This media created image of gays as sensible and effeminate guys it most damaging thing ever, if gays take it as a rolemodel.
Argus: March 3, 2013 at 19:36
“Gay men and straight men aren’t all that different.”
You’re not a real gay man Argus.
A frustration with heterosexualities natural struggles and the inability to get laid doesn’t make you a gay man. These are just day to daily hazards of the male gender.
Daniel, I hope you continue to learn from what is happening here in the U.S. I am not opposed to you commenting here and asking questions.
Not that you need my permission to do so, but I just wanted to give you some support in your inquiry.
pb
Thank you, your support matters, and I am learning a lot! A little terrifying experience but very educational .
“I see a lot of young fathers taking care of their children, on a scale that would be considered science fiction 30 years ago. But are they rewarded for their efforts? No. After a divorce, the mother still gets to keep the children in 95% of the cases.”
That’s the case in the US, in Scandinavia there is default joint custody and most divorced couples take turns raising kids. Most see them every other week. And speaking of men taking care of children – how is that science fiction? Isn’t it normal that men fetch in as much as they can, given that 90% of Norwegian women work full time. In America, even today in some parts of the country, women can choose to be stay at home moms or housewives – not so in Norway. Norwegian women do not have such a choice, they predominantly work outside of home, all their life. Even when the kids are small.
“Women are certainly capable of serving in most military positions. They don`t have to however, simply because they are women.”
How about if we made all men birth babies? Why is it that only women have to do the hard work of labor, huh?
“At “aguy” Perfectly said “Homosexuality is a fringe element of human behavior and should be kept that way, not brought to the forefront and celebrated.” Given the fact that male homosexuals can only be known to be male homosexuals if they want to be, why do they so feel the need to publicize their sexual preferences? Heterosexual men who enjoy sodomizing their wives or girl friends normally do not advertise the fact. Why would they?”
The “gay” identity isn’t really about having sex with guys. It’s a cultural label that people who are homosexuals take on. So it’s an idea and culture that is different from the mainstream culture. So when someone announces that they’re gay, they are announcing that they’re part of the gay community and culture. So when people say that being gay is about having sex, they’re being myopic. To some homosexuals the gay community is their home.
Guys, I really, really feel for you. I think whatever floats your boat is fine, you have to answer to God for whatever choices you make, and so will I. But I think guys are getting the short end of the stick in every way. I have always preferred men over women in many, many ways, women teachers are the worst. (I was a teacher.) They are so petty and tribal. Men just take you as you are. I am so sad for what the PC Marxists have done to our country…but then look at history. I guess it will have to be destroyed before it can be rebuilt.
I think some homosexuality is genetic and some cultural or a matter of an individual’s life experiences. That being said- it’s still a deviation. Whether we like it or not – sexual pleasure is just Nature’s way to promote procreation – everything else is a cultural/social add-on. Most of the homosexuals I have known confided they had either been abused or had unhealthily close mother-son relationships. One guy I knew was a truly decent fellow- but just the sound of his voice was enough to creep you out — one sensed an endless abyss of neediness and a deep sadness. I sense that some had abandoned hope in gaining some clarity about their own situation. To me- it has nothing to do with sex but with a lack of wholeness (that never got a chance to develop).
Daniel, if you haven’t already, you might want to check out the writings by Jack Donovan.
@Daniel
This will be a rather strange comment, but there is a compliment at the end if you can make it through
I believe that God’s way, as shown through the Bible, is the best way. This is true even when I do not understand why.
So, given the above, I of course feel concern for someone such as yourself who is (presumably) engaging in behaviour and thoughts that I believe are harmful to yourself and those around you. I would want to help you to return to the better life that is possible in submission to God.
Unfortunately, as Mr. Price has stated, North American culture tends to be very confrontational. I think “hateful” would be a valid description also. Therefore, many North American people would assume that since I do not agree with you on one point (homosexual acts), I must hate you. They also would assume that I would be incapable of seeing any good or value in you. (Unfortunately many people do think and act that way.)
So, now that we know I disagree with you on at least one point, my response to your words here is: I am very impressed with you. From your writing, it obvious not only that God has given you significant intellect, but also that you have a great grip on your emotional state. By that I mean that, in spite of receiving some comments with “attacking” type words, you still are able to respond with a reasoned, thoughtful answer, instead of responding out of anger.
Well done.
I try to consistently respond calmly to those who try to argue with me, with the desire to have a productive conversation. But I think that your maturity level in this matter may be higher than mine
May God bless and guide you.
Dale
In the Hasidic Jewish tradition- there is a prayer known as the Tikkun Haklali- otherwise known as the General Rectification- aimed at shaking off energies accumulated at the lower levels of being (includes improperly channeled sexual energy). It is said to be effective in resolving sexual addictions.
“Open practice of homosexuality tends to be closely linked to matriarchal societies.”
Really? What matriarchal societies? Have there actually ever been any matriarchal societies???
Realist
“Given that 90% of women work full time”
In 2002 about 85% of able women and 90% of men worked at all. Of these – in 2004 – 38% of women and 5,5% of the men worked part time. Things may have changed a bit in 9-11 years, but not much, and I think “90% of women work full time” is a bit of an overstatement.
http://www.ssb.no/arbeid-og-lonn/artikler-og-publikasjoner/hoy-yrkesdeltakelse-blant-kvinner-i-norden
“In Scandinavia there is default joint custody”
It is true, that in Norway if parents can work out themselves how to divide the children between them, the government doesn`t care. It is in the cases were the parents don`t agree, and go to court, that the Norwegian outcome is pretty much like in the states (and these are not just a few cases).
In 2012, 20,8% of all children between the ages of 0 and 17 lived with their mother alone or mother and stepparent. 4,3% lived with their father alone or father and stepparent. One can assume that with the smaller children the difference is even bigger. When 12 years old, the child can not decide – but have a saying in with which parent it would like to live. The numbers include the cases where the parents themselves have decided what it is best for the child, AND the cases where a judge has decided (in the writing moment I have a hard time finding the different figures for the two).
http://www.ssb.no/a/kortnavn/familie/tab-2013-01-17-16.html
I am sorry the links are in Norwegian only.
“How about it if we made all men birth babies? Why is it that only women have to do the hard work of labor?”
Giving birth to a child is still voluntary. The military draft is not. In Norway the draft is compulsory for men only. I think it works a little differently in the states, but I have heard that if American men don`t sign up for the draft, they don`t receive scholarships? Doesn`t sound very voluntary to me.
Doesn`t matter. The point is that when draft/conscription is compulsory, and having a child isn`t, then the two can`t be compared.
Just think about it, how it would feel like if the government made it your duty to have at least one baby before you turned 25, or else you could go to jail.
Then you have the different nature of the two. I am fully aware of that pregnancies and nursing an infant is not easy. Still, I would consider it a privilege to be able to have a child.
The nature of the military draft is hardly a privilege. In fact, it is the government saying “we don`t need all of you men. Some of you we are willing to sacrifice in the case of an emergency. Some of you are disposable”. The government! Says a lot about their view on men I think.
pb
I have a few MR books, including Warren Farrell and Paul Nathanson. Jack Donovan is new to me though. I will keep it in mind, thank you!
Dave
Thank you so much, you really lift my spirits, and without the help of religion!
I meant Dale
@White Cuban Guy
The genetics of homosexuality:
http://narth.com/2012/02/%E2%80%9Cgenetic-essentialism%E2%80%9D-and-sexual-orientation-why-genetic-explanations-are-often-misleading/
http://narth.com/2010/12/latest-twin-study-confirms-genetic-contribution-to-ssa-is-minor-2/
Many studies on homosexuality may suffer from selection bias:
http://rockingmre.blogspot.ca/2012/09/lgbt-confirmation-bias.html
I’ve observed that there is a soft focus warm and fuzzy thing for womyn which many manginas and “male” feminists demonstrate. Look at how they will sniffle sentimentally about “our mothers-wives-daughters-aunts-grandmothers-blah-blah” when it comes to signing off on “violence against womyn” acts and the like. No thought, of course, how it affects themselves, their sons, brothers, fathers, etc.
The mangina mantra seems to be “gee whiz golly, our little angelic females need us big strong manginas to protect them and give them equality; and in return the girls will let play with us.”
I have pointed out to “male” feminists the obvious contradictions between equality and feminist demands for special treatment. It goes in one ear and out the other. They really want to believe that, underneath it all, women are just like men. And that if we really had ekwality, men could drop the macho posturing and become sensitive little bonobos.
But it will never happen because males and females are inherently different. All the social engineering in the world will not change that. What we end up with is a system of anarcho-tyranny: the breakdown of the family and society in general, while the power of the state increases to protect the interests of womyn.
All this further marginalizes the manginas, who find themselves losing their families, jobs and even freedoms. But rather than admitting that feminism is a disaster, they go on believing it even as the spiral of self-destruction accelerates.
I dislike using terms such as “alpha” and “beta” males. I’d say that the true beta male is the foundation of society: the yeoman-citizen-militaman. But these men are being pushed aside by everything from no-fault divorce to globalization. Feminism is promoted because it provides the ideological justification. Push men out of their jobs and homes and replace them with a mass of easy to manipulate females, dependent upon everything from welfare to protection against violence.
The replacements for the “betas” are, what, “deltas?” Aka manginas. Low caste males who now get their chance to move in on the abandoned beta homesteads and maybe even hang out with the hot chicks. Look at the “male” feminists who prance around at slutwalks. Gee whiz golly, they get to hang out with scantily clad females–just like old Hef’.
Well, cheer up, the end of civilization can not be far at hand.