MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Soft Gender Wars

Filed under: General — Intrepid @ 2:41 am Sat 2nd December 2006

From: Canada
Commentary: Sergeant Preston
Via: The Honor Network

With the Gender War rising you can always count on a frivolous effeminate look at the problems that restates the social destruction being rot in away that reaffirms the let’s talk nice about men’s problems, while we point out things women do that are kinda cute. For example here is just such an attempt from a Canadian media site:

Are you exasperated when you lose your way on a road trip but your boyfriend refuses to stop and ask for directions? What’s up with that?!

And what’s with girls and their shoes and purses? Why can’t they share the closet 50/50 with their guy?

The differences between the sexes are undeniable, and sometimes intolerable. That’s why in this week’s Boy v. Girl Bobby and Amanda help you put your finger on those things that he/she does that drive you zany.

A week of this would make me even more cynical, so I passed on more of Bobby & Amanda’s happy talk. If talking about the problem is supposed to fix things then why do these effeminate rags never actual talk about the problems with women for real- just for once? They can certainly lay out the case against men, though often in an indirect way. I know business must cater to the spending sex at all other times, yet to try and solve something without a looksey at the googooly woogooly problemze is madingly ironic!

I found this in my life too, for I’m a work out the problems kind of guy, for I see it as the same as the need to discuss things before you extend the deck on the porch. What has sent me, and most men, over the deep end is how we must frame everything in the effeminate language to be official “talking about problems.” In new fem-speak, pushed on the TV in countless ways, emotions must be catered to at all times, logic is cold and heartless and mean, and finally for the sake of me not running on “my favorite”, the effeminate idea of “fashionable ideas trump the whole collection of old ones that go back to the beginning of time.” Why? Well because it is fashionable stupid!

The New 3rd or 4th Wave, the New ‘You’ Revolution, and How to Have It All only accomplish in filling the minds of the frivolous and fashion obsessed with unnatural expectations, which is the opposite of good religions. These mystic bad cult-like propaganda vessels are non-stop and loud and have lots of others in the audience standing around clapping and affirming the new mystic BS. In ancient Rome there where specialists who would be placed in the crowd to clap and get others to support what was on the theatre stage long ago too (with bribes of course). At least one was responsible for a revolt in Tiberius’ time.

You would think with so many occasions of reading so many self-help books they’d find the real key to finding themselves, or their true self, or get bored of trying the same method with a new outfit on the surface. Yet when the problems, according to these effeminate cults in waiting reappear, it is always something on the outside of your followers that must be changed, or occasionally the inside in a vague impersonal way that demands some frivolous change in no real way. This is why even churches are changing to compete with this constant historical transformation found in effeminate states. Long held traditions must be changed to meet effeminate fashion, or you will be laughed at for not being hip. In each of these cases things are talked about in a polite often meaningless way when directed to the inside (by inside I mean changing yourself).

Of course if you accept these dollhouse rules there is only one way to win and that is follow the chief practitioners of the craft (Barbie, you play Ken). Now I don’t know how many of you want to be Ken, for I was a GI Joe boy and was lucky enough to blow up my sisters’ doll house, when they moved on to more mature things (the house was infested with the enemy I felt at the time). I think my sisters just upgraded to the bigger dollhouse and they all call this the fall of western society today. By fall I don’t mean money, there’s some of that. I mean birth rate, and those willing to defend any principle or structure, that isn’t new, fashionable and constantly plugged by the boob tube!

“Stubborn is as stubborn does”, to paraphrase Forest Gump, and after women bend like reeds they do as they please when no one is watching anyway. “Indirect stubborn is thus not stubborn, while direct stubborn is the only real stubborn to women” in the effeminate world that we find ourselves in once again. There are men who are all outward flexibility and emotional touchy feely, and are just as stubborn (and on occasion even more so).

Strange how I find many men in the men’s movement who feel men are stubborn, and women are flexible, and thus are big on thinking it’s manly to be stubborn. The issues of stubbornness can’t be placed squarely in either camp with any clarity, but directness verses indirectness surely can be. Loud women are not brave and direct, for when they are loud it is always in a secure situation, where they are assured of no strong response. On talk shows, dinner parties, forums etc anyone one can be Achilles reincarnated, yet to be so when danger is at hand or you are outnumbered and will be isolated- then it takes something fewer women and Manginas have.

Indirectness is from women, and any man who wishes to bring about a new world by practicing indirectness on those closer to him, good family and strangers is dammed to ending up bringing a new version of the same mystic world we have now already (with a new color scheme and matching shoes and purse). This is why unity is beyond many’s grasp. I don’t wish to replace the Medusa Goddess of today with a ever changing Mangina God with a butch name and outfit. And I hope other men agree with me.

1 Comment »

  1. Yes well said Intrepid. Feminist bigots have done all they can to focus on everything thats bad about all ‘men’ (as they say) without ever distinguishing those men from others or without ever focusing on the very same issues of bad behaviour in ‘women’.

    Comment by eye of the tiger — Mon 4th December 2006 @ 4:43 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar