[dropcap]I[/dropcap]t is not a secret that mens rights advocates and feminists of various flavor frequently find themselves in opposition to one another. In fact, a significant fraction of the activism of an MRA is the refutation of feminist public narrative. However, I’ve made a practice of describing the organized opponents of male human rights with carefully chosen nomenclature. An increasing tendency to avoid the frequently misleading brand name of feminism has informed my recent content. There is a reason to prefer the term ideologue.
There are fundamental differences between philosophy and ideology. Ideology refers to a set of beliefs or doctrines that support a social institution or organization. By contrast, philosophy refers to looking at life in a pragmatic manner and attempting to understand the principles governing it.
Stated simply, ideology attempts to conform reality to a believed state of affairs, whereas philosophy tries to understand the world in its current state. Ideology is rigid, and once fixed on certain beliefs, does not change its stance respective to change in the surrounding environment.
An ideologue is nothing more than a practitioner of this type of thinking. An individual who begins all inquiries already knowing “the truth,” and shaping observations and facts to support their doctrine. This is why attempts at reasoned discussion with a majority of feminists is an exercise in futility.
Truth doesn’t matter. This is evident in the persistent repetition of feminism’s false facts. 1 in 4, the wage gap, the glass ceiling, tra-la-la-la.
In spite of the intransigence of true believers, rebutting the mainstream narrative of female victimhood and masculine malevolence remains an imperative. The wilful promotion and repetition of false facts has more behind it than just ignorance, or even the maintained power of the role of victimhood. The real problem is that all the benefit to operatives of the big box doctrine comes at a cost. That cost is increasingly a tiered society which destroys human lives, treats fundamental human rights as optional based on demographic. All this to justify the budgets of advocacy researchers and state functionaries who don’t even bother to disguise their fraud.
Need an example? Eric Holder, you know, Attorney motherfucking General who continues to stand on his claim that “Intimate partner homicide is the leading cause of death for African-American women ages 25 to 44.”
The claim is fraud, and numerous individuals and organizations have publicly called for its correction. This has gone unanswered by the AG’s office to date. Need another example?
Susan Brownmiller – who regularly contributes to the huffinton-post, and other high traffic sites never tires of citing her 1975 propaganda piece normalizing the asinine dogma that all men are rapists and all women are victims.
From page 14 of Against Our Will, “Man’s discovery that his genitalia could serve as a weapon to generate fear must rank as one of the most important discoveries of prehistoric times, along with the use of fire and the first crude stone axe. From prehistoric times to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function. It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear”
This is an argument of conscious intimidation by all men of all women – and gentlemen – your body is not a natural part of your self, no. It’s a weapon. Let any proponent of this much-cited yellow ink try to claim it is not designed to generate hatred and fear.
These examples are not unusual by any measure, rather – our culture has normalized institutional hatred against half the human race. This is not a byproduct of natural atavism, the fear of the “other” underlying the bigotry of racism. This is a hatred knowingly cultivated by academicians, activists and elected officials who accommodate and abet the established and interlocking business models of victim-feminist ideology which trades, and escalates real carnage done to men and women for the salaries of this industry’s operatives.
Unopposed, where does systemic institutional promotion of hatred of an entire demographic lead over a period of decades? History answers this question, but that logical end point seems implausible considering that men and women, not only need each other – continue to seek each other out of mutual attraction.
At present, the collected initiatives of the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (spot the irony) and the FBI’s redefinition of rape indicate a rapid shift in law to a system in which due process and presumed innocence apply selectively, based on sex. This is not wild speculation, its happening already in colleges and universities. The “Dear Colleague” letter from the department of Ed ties funding to schools convening their own student run courts, without due process or the apparatus of an actual legal system. Students accused of sexual misconduct are being academically snuffed and robbed of their tuition in extra-judicial courts of ideology.
The academic sandbox serves as the beta test for pseudo legal, for-profit ritual human sacrifice. If a human is male, they’re ruled by the law, but not protected by it. This doesn’t lead directly to transport by boxcars to camps – but who imagines a tiered society along sexual ideological lines has any outcome except violent societal convulsion.
This is why bigots and ideologues are a concern. That’s an understatement. They’re a cultural toxin. None of this is happening by itself. The eradication of civil liberties for men is the outcome of half a century’s labour by feminist and other ideologues. The large scale, funded and organized promotion and normalization of the hate and fear of men is cultivated by individuals. Most such individuals are provided a free pass, and their overt promotion of hatred and fear characterized as charity and humanist concern. Repetition of hateful and obvious lies is cheered by a kool-aid drinking public who buy into the story. The standard fabricated narrative that marginalizing and stripping human rights from one demographic will benefit the exalted owners of ovaries.
Proponents of hate continue to shape a public zeitgeist in which the murder of men is excused. The ideologues writing articles and books telling a female electorate that their emotions matter more than facts, and that good men are the ones willing to self sacrifice for female privilege, passed off as empowerment.
This is why identifying, documenting and publicly exposing ideologues matters. It is opposition to hate and violence. This is the reason that among rapists, killers, false rape accusers – the category of Bigot exists on the site register-her.com. It is why we identify ideological bigots, shine a bright light on them for the world to see, and afford promoters of hate no mercy – and no rest.