Welcome!

To my surprise and delight, some of the very antifeminist bloggers I have been reading and learning from and gaining relief from for a couple of years now have discovered my blog here, and linked to me. Counter-Feminist was even kind enough to devote a post to me!

CF cordially critiqued my approach, and he does have a point, but I don’t intend to change it. I started this blog because I needed a vent. I have to keep my mouth shut most of the time. I was talking to a female friend of mine, who only knows that I’m in favor of full-time mothers (shocking enough in this day and age), and the Nineteenth Amendment came up in passing. She remarked, “I find it amusing that they thought we couldn’t handle all that, voting and business.” I had to sit there and bite my tongue so as not to point out that “they” have since been proven abundantly right.

I keep an LJ with which I keep in contact with people who share my hobbies, and of course most of them assume that the ends of feminism are an indisputable good. Once I linked the article – you can find it in my sidebar – about how mothers whose military husbands are overseas abuse their children more, with no comment, and I got indignant comments saying how unfair the article was to the nonabusive mothers who are carrying on with their husbands far away and in danger, and other comments pointing out that fathers commit child abuse too, etc. It takes so little to set off feminist indignation even in relatively sane people these days, because they have been trained carefully for that. I needed a place where I could say exactly what I think.

Besides which, it’s vitally important that not only antifeminist, but male chauvinist theories get a hearing. I’m a well-read intellectual, but still the ideas introduced to me by such sages as Daniel Amneus were completely new to me. Worse, I soon realized that until the 1960’s, those very ideas were simply common sense. Mr. Amneus expressed them in a more sophisticated fashion, but everyone understood and accepted their truth. The feminist propaganda machine has left us without ammunition. When I tried to explain to some friends why default father custody is a necessity for civilization, the most they were able to concede was that default mother custody was unfair, and divorce courts ought to spend more time with each divorcing couple to figure out which parent would be the best for those particular children.

So I will be writing up my philosophy of male chauvinism here, bit by bit. I don’t expect to change the minds of feminists, as they have come to their conclusions by way of emotion rather than reason. I am writing for my fellow antifeminists and misogynists, to help them as other antifeminist and male chauvinist writers have helped me make sense of what is happening to our civilization. And, in the fullness of time, to take action.

EDIT: Another of my favorite MRA bloggers, Hawaiian Libertarian, also made a post about me! I’m tremendously flattered.

Advertisements

9 Responses to “Welcome!”

  1. Fidelbogen Says:

    “CF cordially critiqued my approach, and he does have a point, but I don’t intend to change it. . “

    Oh. . . you silly little thing, you! 😉

    Don’t mind me, go right on doing what you’re doing. Hey, after all, as I said, it’s not my job to oppose anybody’s misogyny . . .

    “Misogyny” is such an overblown pile of horsefeathers, anyway! Just another phony crisis that the feminists invented, just to get everybody else’s longjohns in loop….

    Oh, here’s another valuable insight for free: “misogyny” and “patriarchy” are independent variables. They are entirely separate things which SOMETIMES wrap around each other, but aren’t inherently bound to do so. That’s a distinction which the feminists would do well to keep in mind, but of course they won’t: it is more to their advantage to obfuscate!

    Anyway…

    The non-feminist sector (more to come on that subject) is plenty big enough to accomodate anybody who is simply not a feminist. And the nice thing is, that it’s not a “movement”, so its various sub-sectors need not answer to or for each other in any way. . .

  2. Fidelbogen Says:

    “CF cordially critiqued my approach, and he does have a point, but I don’t intend to change it. . “

    Oh. . . you silly little thing, you! 😉

    Don’t mind me, go right on doing what you’re doing. Hey, after all, as I said, it’s not my job to oppose anybody’s misogyny . . .

    “Misogyny” is such an overblown pile of horsefeathers, anyway! Just another phony crisis that the feminists invented, just to get everybody else’s longjohns in loop….

    Oh, here’s another valuable insight for free: “misogyny” and “patriarchy” are independent variables. They are entirely separate things which SOMETIMES wrap around each other, but aren’t inherently bound to do so. That’s a distinction which the feminists would do well to keep in mind, but of course they won’t: it is more to their advantage to obfuscate!

    Anyway…

    The non-feminist sector (more to come on that subject) is plenty big enough to accomodate anybody who is simply not a feminist. And the nice thing is, that it’s not a “movement”, so its various sub-sectors need not answer to or for each other in any way. . .

  3. Fidelbogen Says:

    “CF cordially critiqued my approach, and he does have a point, but I don’t intend to change it. . “

    Oh. . . you silly little thing, you! 😉

    Don’t mind me, go right on doing what you’re doing. Hey, after all, as I said, it’s not my job to oppose anybody’s misogyny . . .

    “Misogyny” is such an overblown pile of horsefeathers, anyway! Just another phony crisis that the feminists invented, just to get everybody else’s longjohns in loop….

    Oh, here’s another valuable insight for free: “misogyny” and “patriarchy” are independent variables. They are entirely separate things which SOMETIMES wrap around each other, but aren’t inherently bound to do so. That’s a distinction which the feminists would do well to keep in mind, but of course they won’t: it is more to their advantage to obfuscate!

    Anyway…

    The non-feminist sector (more to come on that subject) is plenty big enough to accomodate anybody who is simply not a feminist. And the nice thing is, that it’s not a “movement”, so its various sub-sectors need not answer to or for each other in any way. . .

  4. Zeth Says:

    Nice blog, I am interested in this area too, so I just read through the archive after bouncing here from CounterFem.

    The article about child abuse rising when their husbands are deployed in the military is scary.

    Interestingly, the article still tries to explain away the phenomenon, it sees men as passive creatures when inside the house, rather than the more obvious explanation that they are a positive force in the home, that men and women both have complimentary roles within the family. When you remove one partner then the situation loses balance and the welfare of the child suffers.

  5. Zeth Says:

    Nice blog, I am interested in this area too, so I just read through the archive after bouncing here from CounterFem.

    The article about child abuse rising when their husbands are deployed in the military is scary.

    Interestingly, the article still tries to explain away the phenomenon, it sees men as passive creatures when inside the house, rather than the more obvious explanation that they are a positive force in the home, that men and women both have complimentary roles within the family. When you remove one partner then the situation loses balance and the welfare of the child suffers.

  6. Zeth Says:

    Nice blog, I am interested in this area too, so I just read through the archive after bouncing here from CounterFem.

    The article about child abuse rising when their husbands are deployed in the military is scary.

    Interestingly, the article still tries to explain away the phenomenon, it sees men as passive creatures when inside the house, rather than the more obvious explanation that they are a positive force in the home, that men and women both have complimentary roles within the family. When you remove one partner then the situation loses balance and the welfare of the child suffers.

  7. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Welcome, Zeth!

    Yes, I noticed how the article tried rather frantically to pretend that the problem was something other than it was. It even whined that some of these poooor women who abuse their children needed *help* and weren’t getting it, waaah!

  8. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Welcome, Zeth!

    Yes, I noticed how the article tried rather frantically to pretend that the problem was something other than it was. It even whined that some of these poooor women who abuse their children needed *help* and weren’t getting it, waaah!

  9. Male Chauvinist Woman Says:

    Welcome, Zeth!

    Yes, I noticed how the article tried rather frantically to pretend that the problem was something other than it was. It even whined that some of these poooor women who abuse their children needed *help* and weren’t getting it, waaah!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: