Is Feminism a Hate Group?
This video clip labels feminism as a hate group. It compares white America 60 years ago.
Its not about what they feel and think, it’s about what they do.
1. Advocates lesser rights in law for the target group.
2. Propagates discrimination against the target group.
3. Teaches that the target group is inherently inferior.
4. Teaches that the target group is a threat.
5. Use lies including historical revisionism to spread these views.
6. Tolerates violence towards the target group.
If you change the words “Target Group” to men, boys or fathers. The picture becomes easier to see.
1. Advocates lesser rights in law for men, boys or fathers.
2. Propagates discrimination against men, boys or fathers.
3. Teaches that the men, boys or fathers are inherently inferior.
4. Teaches that the men, boys or fathers are a threat.
5. Use lies, including historical revisionism to spread these views.
6. Tolerates violence towards men, boys or fathers.
There are moves to punish hate speech. But in my view it is more than hate speech. It has to be hate actions and hate laws. Discrimination against men, fathers and boys.
It is really important for men and fathers to realise that extreme feminists are are just the same as other groups which are obviously repressing their target groups. Racist whites in the USA are repressing Black Americans is a good example.
Unless men wake up it will only get worse.
I remember watching an old clip.
Of an older feminist.
She was asked if she hated men.
“No, I just think they are pathetic”
Was her reply.
They didn’t ask how many cats, she owned.
I think she replied with hate speech.
Labelling everyone of a gender, with a derogatory term.
The video, pointing it out.
Although she said no, she then said yes.
I use the term Hate Men Feminism.
Definitely the NZ version, of feminism.
The video aptly showing, what men’s groups are.
Far more like actual feminism, than feminists.
In some ways it’s an economic system, feminism.
Society biased towards, females.
Males paying, more than they receive.
Females paying, less than they receive.
Males working more, and dying more.
So even things like relationship property.
Males losing more.
Females gaining more.
Many to help females.
Few to help males.
Even those provided.
Is part of persecution, of males.
Protecting, helping females.
Isolation, restrictions, indoctrination policies.
All to support an ideology.
Of female only parenting.
Not equal parenting.
Equal parenting, would be actual feminism.
It is not a group.
No more than the Patriarchy is a group.
It is an ideology, made culture.
And made real, with laws, and policy.
Communism, Capitalism, Socialism, Despotism.
Feminism is no different.
Someone must be worse off.
#1 Joseph. Can you give us some examples of “Racist whites in the USA are repressing Black Americans” ?
It’s the USA, not New Zealand.
So hard to comment on the racism.
If you haven’t lived in the society.
But I don’t know of legal examples.
Where law, is repressive.
There is certainly racism in the USA.
With nearly all white communities.
Just as a white man, may feel uncomfortable.
In some all black communities.
Police arrest demographics is a difficult argument.
If most arrests come from public made calls.
Should they not attend.
If the police are looking for crime, stereotyping.
Then that can look like racism.
Even then, if there was an arrest.
There was a crime.
So for males it’s the same, argument.
Calls are made when males misbehave.
They don’t when females misbehave.
And the police stereotyping.
Young males in cars, get pulled over.
Checked, for compliance.
The black male, highest in those demographics.
Imagine that life.
Feminism, and racism.
Joseph wrote; “racist whites in the USA are repressing Black Americans”. Not sure I understand your comment. The fact is, white people are overwhelmingly the victims of assault, rape and racial abuse. It is not the other way around
Looks like Feminists are on a propaganda binge.
Obviously visual, with the picture.
Bad man abused, suffering women.
As the start.
So the data.
“These numbers used to be much higher. In 2008, for example, if police attended a domestic violence call-out – now officially termed a “Family Harm Investigation” – there was a 25 per cent chance it would lead to a prosecution, more than twice as likely as now.”
Obviously policy changed.
From arbitrary arrest.
To arbitrary arrest, or PSO.
Then there’s the graph, on investigations and prosecutions.
The propaganda is in the wording.
They are events.
The graph indicates, actual prosecutions, decreasing.
Especially on a per capital basis.
“That is a deeply concerning trend,” Women’s Refuge policy advisory Natalie Thorburn says. “While there has been an increasing police focus on getting victims the right support, that should never take the place of holding perpetrators accountable for violence.”
What a joke.
If the hospitalisation rate graph, is evidence, an indication.
Of what should be prosecutable.
There is a lot of female offenders missing, from court.
Oops sorry, they were wounds, from the female.
And the 90% male PSO rate.
How is that explained away.
“Victim surveys suggest that family violence levels remain extremely high.”
I wonder what “victim” surveys would say.
No one knows why?
I can guess, or reckon.
Base rates of violence is the same, by gender.
No policy will change DNA.
Males that are violent.
Must be becoming, more violent when they are violent.
Males that are borderline violent, are less likely, to be violent.
To a prosecution level.
Increased female hospital visits, can also be questioned.
As just the visit, is important, as evidence in the Family Court, etc.
The seriousness, is not measured, in the graph.
Or even, under arrest, assessment, being treated for injuries.
What else could explain the changing ratios.
Ultimately non prosecutable violence “events” are increasing.
IE female domestic violence, in all its enabled forms, is increasing.
Or at least reported on by neighbours.
As that’s the only domestic violence, normally not prosecuted.
Or not resulting in a PSO.
Not talked about, in the article, obviously.
Give us more money, articles.
From Refuge, Backbone, Shine, are sure to follow.
And the experts, them.
Are oblivious to why?
Are they then experts.
I agree. This is simply a pitch for more funding and ignores the 2014 reforms that saw PSOs increase from 30% to over 70%. It also ignores the the role of the family court. The family court picks up where the Police end and men are forced to walk the gauntlet of a process run by women for women.
My ex pulled a knife on me and I have a corroborating text. The judge in my case said if my ex had disclosed that when applying for a PSO, it would not have been granted. Not that that helped me much 🙂
So that’s Father’s Day from Stuff.
Is that it.
We laze around.
And have “responsibility”
A very Hate Men Feminist perspective of the role of dads.
That’s it as the headline.
Dare not try to be responsible, to much.
Like have 50:50 care, legislated.
That would be equal parenting.
And that’s not permitted for dads.
But they do get responsibility.
Someone wrote this.
From a mother abducts child case.
Accuses father of abuse.
Child rescued, as perspective.
But the writer supports the mother.
“This is what it means for women having to live in patriarchal/male supremacist societies and where the tiny rights we have gained are being obliterated in the name of men’s right to dominate, control and own women and children.”
Tiny rights gained.
Where is the writer living.
Cleary not NZ.
Males have no rights, more than women.
I think the writer has a problem, with men.
Where are women’s rights being obliterated.
Clearly not NZ.
The writer, could not name, a single one.
Also this from the same writer.
“Remember ‘injustice’ is anything which curbs or limits men’s power over women and ‘justice’ is when men’s power and domination over women is maintained and defined as ‘natural and right!’
That’s also clearly not NZ.
Interesting case this one.
So the producers create a story line.
Using a real woman as the example.
Saying she was discriminated against.
A made up story line of a oppressed women.
Not allowed to compete against men.
The truth is the opposite.
She is suing for them falsely stating her history.
Presenting her as a victim.
When she wasn’t.
The producers think it’s OK.
A feminist show, lying about feminism.
Must be normal to them.
The truth is irrelevant.