Tag Archives: Man-hatred

Culture, Feminism, Media, Men, Radicalism

Negotiating the tangle of feminist irrationality

Many men – probably most men – simply can’t follow the ‘reasoning’ behind much feminist activism. It takes the keen analytical mind of Janice Fiamengo to sort through the irrationality for them. The article below is a brilliant example of her comprehensively tearing apart feminist discourse and activism.

I’m at the point in my life where I just wish that women would get dressed and stay dressed in public. I’ve seen enough bare breasts and big bums to last more than a lifetime.

*****

The Curious Case of the Self-Objectifying Feminist

If the male gaze demeans and dehumanizes, why do so many women court it?

Janice Fiamengo Sep 14, 2024

Not long ago, a British campaign for affirmative consent legislation featured images of women paired with the slogan “I’m asking for it.” The whole point, of course, is that they’re not asking for “it”. The phrase is meant to evoke men who justify their sexual assaults of women by claiming that the victim wanted to be raped. What the women are asking for is legislation to make it a criminal offence for a man to have a sexual encounter with a woman without eliciting an explicit “Yes” from her at every stage (how far we have moved from the relatively simple “No means no”).

The most striking of the ads features the face of Charlotte Proudman, the well-known feminist barrister and zealous anti-male advocate who once denounced a fellow lawyer for complimenting her LinkedIn photo. In the picture, Proudman confronts the viewer with a sexy, smoldering look and a slight half-smile. Her face is carefully made up to accentuate her feminine sexuality, with dark-tinted eyelashes and gleaming red lips outlined in vivid lip gloss. In order to object to men’s sexualization of women, Proudman has sexualized herself.

Image

We are told that the campaign was “deliberately bold and intentionally provocative.” It was designed to “stop viewers in their tracks,” so that we would think about how women are mistreated under the law. Male viewers whose minds stray to sex are, one can only assume, to be brought up short, ashamed and convicted of sin.

The double messaging is deliberate—but confusing. Most people looking at Charlotte Proudman’s sex-kitten face will not, in my opinion, contemplate misogynistic attitudes or the scourge of sexual violence. On the contrary, most viewers will be “stopped in their tracks” by the overtness of Proudman’s sensual self-display. It seems odd that an ad claiming that women should not be seen to invite sexual advances features a woman who seems to be inviting sexual advances.

Feminists have for decades claimed that such sexualization has been forced on women to their detriment. In the fashion industry, in movies, and in daily life, according to feminist philosophers like Sandra Lee Bartky, men compel women to advertise their sexuality as their primary power, to redden their lips, assume sexual poses and flatter the voracious male gaze, becoming “object and prey for the man.”

For centuries, we’re told, patriarchal societies denied women the opportunity to do anything with their lives but live out male sexual fantasies, whether as virgin or whore, Madonna or muse. A male-defined culture made the woman accentuate her youth, shave her legs, remain svelte, and present herself for visual consumption, “living her body as seen by another, an anonymous patriarchal Other”: a degrading spectacle from which all women would be better off free.

Yet here is a campaign designed by feminists to support alleged rape victims, with the same (objectionable) self-presentation by the ad’s primary subject, who is obviously not posing against her will and obviously has many choices about how to present herself. The only difference, it seems, is that in this case, the woman’s self-display is entirely of her own defiant volition.

One wouldn’t think that would be sufficient for a diehard feminist like Proudman, or for any equality-minded modern woman with a thousand choices about what to do with her life.

When I was a little girl in the early 1970s, I took it for granted that self-respecting women wanted to be appreciated for the qualities of their minds and characters. One of the first slogans I remember was the somewhat puzzling “Love me for my mind, not my body.” At the time, around six or seven years old, I thought it would be nice to be loved for any reason. Only later did I understand the implication: to be loved for one’s body was not truly to be loved at all, for the body was a superficial, mutable aspect of the self, destined to deteriorate with time. Moreover, according to the general feminist perspective, the body was all that sexist men cared about, especially the sexual parts. This was objectification, the reduction of the whole woman with all she had to offer (her kindness, her wit, her unique thoughts) to a thing. It was shameful and degrading.

This idea is definitely still current in pervasive talk of objectification. On International Women’s Day of this past year, one X user calling herself Liberal Jane (a “Queer feminist making art about bodily autonomy”) tweeted “Happy #Women’sHistoryMonth to all the badass women and girls who are making this world a better place everyday [sic]. Empowered women empower all women.” The tweet was accompanied by a drawing, perhaps by Jane herself, showing an “empowered” girl complete with nose ring and unshaven legs.

Illustration of a young person sitting crisscross applesauce. They have long flowing hair that is half up in a ponytail and a nose ring. The person is rolling their eyes and is wearing a mustard t-shirt, pink shorts and chunky white sneakers. There are two speech bubbles that read, 'rather be an obnoxious feminist than be complicit in my own dehumanization.' The background is light pink with yellow sparkles

Though the girl is conventionally pretty and slim, with wavy hair, shapely limbs, a plump pink mouth, and painted fingernails, the fact that she has not shaved her legs seems to signal her rejection of male-imposed beauty standards. This girl is a badass because she doesn’t waste her time or energy courting the male gaze. She is not “complicit in her own dehumanization.” Her very existence—given that it is not about inflaming male sexual desire—is allegedly a boon to other women.

Read the brilliant rest here . . .

Culture, Feminism, Law, Media, Radicalism

Legalizing man-hatred

We’re All Terrorists Now

Make no mistake: our governments want to outlaw dissent from feminism

Janice Fiamengo, Sep 01, 2024

UK set to treat extreme misogyny as a form of terrorism: report

One can sense the beginning of a joke: a radical feminist (barrister Charlotte Proudman), a men’s advocate (Ally Fogg of the Men and Boys Coalition), and a professor who studies the manosphere (cyber threat specialist Joe Whittaker) walk into a BBC studio to discuss the UK government’s announced plan to tackle misogyny (BBC Sounds, “Should some forms of misogyny be classed as extremism?”). The joke is that no real debate occurs, despite Fogg’s contention that boys and men are as much victims as victimizers. Overall, the three agree that extreme misogyny is a “serious” “pervasive” problem, that it is prevalent throughout online men’s discussions (in the so-called “manosphere”), and that boys and men must be educated out of any tendency to direct anger at women or feminism.

Inch by feminist inch, what was once a convenient exaggeration (that criticism of feminism and non-feminist men’s discussion are misogynistic) has become the only allowable view.

***

No one who has been paying attention should be surprised. According to a report in The Telegraph, the UK’s revamped counter-terror strategy will likely address “extreme misogyny” as one of a number of “emerging ideologies” that “promote violence” and “undermine democracy.” The strategy will make it mandatory for teachers to refer pupils suspected of such misogyny to counter-terror officials; and will draw an equivalence between recruiters for Islamist bombings and influencers such as Andrew Tate. While details are as yet vague, the purpose seems undeniable: to (further) politicize any and all violence against women as an expression of woman-hating (an idea already embedded in terminology such as femicide and gender-based violence), and to stigmatize critics of feminism as potential threats to national security.

There is no reason to believe the UK plan will differ from efforts in other parts of the English-speaking world to link anti-feminism to political violence. Canadian legislation already defines incel violence as a form of terrorism; and Canadian authorities have prosecuted a knife attack at a massage parlor under the new law. A recent report by academics at the University of Melbourne alleges that “misogynistic beliefs” are a “significant predictor of most forms of violent extremism.” The US Prevention Practitioners Network provides a detailed outline of the alleged relationship between political violence and manosphere internet content.

Can the UK Combat 'Extreme Misogyny' Like Terrorism? A Flawed Approach - World News - Thailand News, Travel & Forum - ASEAN NOW

Notable in all these initiatives is a revised definition of terrorism. Terrorism was once understood as the use of violence to achieve a political end through tactics of intimidation, and a terrorist was someone who advocated, supported, and carried out such violence. Now officials speak of violent extremism rather than terrorism, and shift the emphasis from extremist violence to extremism. According to this definition, an extremist may be someone who argues that men should avoid marriage; or believes there are significant differences between men and women. An anguished, bullied loner like Marc Lépine is transformed under this view into an aggrieved revolutionary with a political agenda. Even a twelve-year-old boy who asks his teacher “What color is your Bugatti” (an Andrew Tate meme), laughs with mates at a school video on same-sex relationships, or has prepared answers (now called “hate scripts”) for his teacher’s feminism is seen as at risk for “radicalization.”

Read the rest here . . .

Australia, Culture, Feminism, Law, Media, Men, Radicalism

5 billion dollars to persecute men

The Albanese leftist government has allocated almost 5 billion dollars to the feminists to persecute men and lock them up wherever possible. It is an irony that Janice Fiamengo’s latest comment has just appeared.

*****

The Victim is Always Female

The real (male) victims of false allegations are often quickly passed over

Janice Fiamengo, Sep 05, 2024

“Better ten innocent men go to jail than one potential female victim hesitate to come forward.”

At least, that seemed to be the consensus in 2017, when I first made this video. I’m not sure it’s still entirely true, though I do often hear the ‘Ultimately, this will hurt women …’ argument when the subject is male disadvantage or blatant anti-male injustice.

This video was originally part of the No Joke Janice video series, designed by my friend and producer Steve Brule as short audio commentary on current events. (Over time, many of the videos became indistinguishable from the main Fiamengo File videos, longer and more detailed—before they were all taken down by YouTube’s censors in one fell swoop. Steve is now re-posting many of them at Studio B.)

In the video, I used a couple of then-recent news items to analyze how media consistently put the spotlight on women as the primary victims of women’s false accusations against men. Even when a man had spent years in prison on a made-up charge, judges and pundits usually expressed concern about the negative effect on other potential female accusers (though evidence of this negative effect was never produced).

Re-watching the video yesterday, I wondered if it was still quite as true now as I believed it to be then. Is this an area in which men’s issues advocates have actually made a difference in putting the focus on harms to men? Or has feminist hysteria simply backfired on itself? Recently, Bettina Arndt hosted a conference on “Restoring the Presumption of Innocence” that brought many concerned Australian citizens together around the issue.

Read the rest here . . .

Culture, Feminism, Law, Media, Men

Restoring the Presumption of Innocence conference

Falsely accused

– Avi Yemini on why our conference is so essential.

Bettina Arndt, Aug 29, 2024

There’s great excitement here, now that we have reached the final few days before our conference next Saturday. It looks like we will have over 200 people attending – a large, lively crowd for this important event.

We were delighted with this last-minute interview with Avi Yemini from Rebel News, talking to me about his own experiences of false allegations, which are very relevant to the conference. Avi is one of the very few well-known men in Australia to speak out about the devastating impact of having false domestic violence allegations used to try to stop him seeing his children.

So, here is a man with skin in the game and it is wonderful that he has decided to live stream the conference on Rebel News.

Read the rest here . . .

Culture, Feminism, Law, Media, Radicalism

Exposing the feminist enemy

Coincidentally, the comment below from Bettina Arndt’s substack arrived today. There is reference to Micaela Cronin’s man-hating rant (see previous comment).

*****

Movember is a fake

– New plans to fight back and properly support men

Bettina Arndt, Aug 22, 2024

How do Australian men get out of bed every morning? I just can’t imagine how men cope with the endless vilification, the constant betrayals by those in power.  

This week we saw another example of men being conned. Every year in this country many thousands of men grow moustaches in November, fondly imagining that they do this to raise money for men’s health.

Don’t kid yourself. Movember, the organisation roping in the millions of dollars from these poor suckers, has always sold men out by avoiding controversial issues and pandering to the feminist narrative. They run suicide prevention programmes, for instance, which studiously avoid any mention of what our Australian Bureau of Statistics names as one of the major causes of male suicide – relationship breakdown.

Now Movember is handing over $3.2 million of the money raised by these men to the male-bashing Albanese Government “to help young men and boys foster healthy, respectful relationships as part of efforts to end gender-based violence.”

Stealing money donated by ordinary blokes and using it to shame boys and vilify men. How disgusting is that? And this comes even after key domestic violence policy makers have admitted that programs to change misogynist attitudes are unsuccessful in reducing domestic violence.  

Movember’s $3.2 million is a pittance compared to the $3.4 billion the Albanese government has committed to “women’s safety.” Yesterday Albo’s DV Commissioner poured out the usual anti-male propaganda to the National Press Club but naturally the media responded with the women’s group complaints that the money is still not enough.

We all know our governments have been captured and only ever dance to the feminists’ tune. But it is an absolute tragedy that so many of our key organisations claiming to help men are really working against them. It’s only going to get worse… unless we get out there, expose what they are doing, and find ways to stop them. 

New plans of attack

That’s what makes our conference even more important. The assault on the presumption of innocence in our courts is simply one of the most telling consequences on this toxic culture – which our speakers will expose at the Restoring the Presumption of Innocence conference on August 31.

Read the rest here . . .

Culture, Feminism, Law, Media, Radicalism

A tyranny of hysterical man-hatred

Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner Micaela Cronin presented (21 August) a report on Australia’s domestic violence to an audience of sympathetic media feminists at the National Press Club.

I will provide two media reports on Commissar Cronin’s report to lay out the main points. The first (below) is from news.com.au. The second (following) will be from the ABC.

Cronin’s hysterical (emotional, not funny) rant against men regurgitates all the usual accusations against men in cases of ‘domestic violence’ which at least should be called domestic conflict. The correct title should be couple conflict. There is never just one person in couple conflict – to state the obvious.

For Cronin and her feelingly sympathetic feminist audience, the man is always the perpetrator, and the woman is always the victim – the eternal victim. The woman never does anything to provoke conflict. Oh no, never.

Ask the women who fall prey to another woman’s devastating spite, calumny, and backbiting. If a man’s verbal abuse or coercion is rated under ‘domestic violence’, the female’s mouth can be doubly so.

Not only does the ordinary person’s experience speak against such claims against men, but the professional people I cite here cogently argue against that nonsense. I refer one to the articles and research of Bettina Arndt and Janice Fiamengo.

There are, however, two points in Cronin’s presentation that I want to highlight. According to news.com.au ‘she said Australia needed to be using all of the tools that are available for tackling terrorism, including monitoring social media, to end violence against women and children.’

“I think that what we need is for the community to take as seriously threats of domestic, family and sexual violence as they take terrorist threats, act on them as urgently and recognise that they are different,” Ms Cronin said.

It is difficult to comprehend that a rational person who experiences everyday life, including the many moments of disagreement between couples, could reduce couple conflict to terrorism initiated by the man.

How is a couple’s conflict analogical with ideological beheadings, stabbings, shootings, and bombings? Well, it’s not. It is delusional to suggest it.

The second point I want to highlight is the question of family law. One of the major complaints men have in divorce settlements is the outrageous unfairness of Australia’s family law legislation. The settlement is almost always weighted strongly in favour of the woman, sometimes leaving the man with barely anything of what he has worked for. But news.com.au reports:

‘The federal government will on Thursday introduce changes to the family law system that would ensure family and domestic violence can be taken into consideration in property settlements for separating families.’

And Cronin says: “Victims and survivors of family violence can struggle to achieve a fair division of property after a relationship breakdown, and often suffer long-term financial disadvantage.”

Where did they get this ridiculous woman from – a woman so out of touch with reality – a woman who does not hesitate to compare couple conflict with international ideologically motivated terrorism?

Men have to wake up and do something. That something is political action – working through our political system to hunt from office those politicians and political parties who enable this extreme prejudice against men. We know who they are.

The next federal election – arguably the most crucial since Federation – is likely to be at the beginning of 2025. Men should start their political preparations now.

*****

Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner: Australia’s DV response must be as urgent as terrorism

Courts, police and services on the frontline of Australia’s domestic violence crisis are “causing harm,” the nation’s top expert has warned, in a plea for more resources to protect vulnerable women and children.

Jade Gailberger and Clare Armstrong August 21, 2024

Courts, police and services on the frontline of Australia’s domestic violence crisis are “causing harm,” the nation’s top expert has warned, in a plea for more resources to protect vulnerable women and children.

Calling for the scourge of abuse to be taken as seriously as “terrorism”, Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner Micaela Cronin on Wednesday handed down the first report card into the national response.

The report highlighted an alarming 43 per cent spike in the rate of police recorded DV-related sexual assaults for women between 2014 and 2022.

Meanwhile, the federal government will on Thursday introduce changes to the family law system that would ensure family and domestic violence can be taken into consideration in property settlements for separating families.

It can be exclusively revealed that National Legal Aid is calling on Labor to invest $317m in domestic violence legal services to meet demand and stop women being turned away.

Micaela Cronin says Australia’s response to domestic and family violence must be as urgent as terrorism. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Micaela Cronin says Australia’s response to domestic and family violence must be as urgent as terrorism. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman

“I think that what we need is for the community to take as seriously threats of domestic, family and sexual violence as they take terrorist threats, act on them as urgently and recognise that they are different,” Ms Cronin said.

She said Australia needed to be using all of the tools that are available for tackling terrorism, including monitoring social media, to end violence against women and children.

Labor is introducing family law changes to ensure the best interests of children are a central consideration.

Labor is introducing family law changes to ensure the best interests of children are a central consideration.

The first annual report into the 10-year national plan states that “serious concerns have been raised that government systems, including the family court and child protection system, are causing harm, and that police too often misidentify women as the primary aggressor – with terrible consequences – when they are the person most in need of protection”.

It calls for increased accountability for people who use violence and reinforces that “frontline and crisis services need to be better and more sustainably resourced.”

Read the rest here . . .

Feminism, Law, Men, The Left

The (unfair) power of women’s tears

Calling a Moratorium on Women’s Tears: How Women Use the Accountability Gap to Manipulate Men and Why Men Must Resist It

By Janice Fiamengo

My subject is the problem of women’s tears. I argue that the exploitation of female tears creates an accountability gap in our societies; I’ve decided to use that phrase, accountability gap, rather than my original damseling, which describes something more specific.

My contention is that most feminist laws, policies, and social movements—whether MeToo, rape shield laws, the biased family court system, sexual harassment policies in the workplace, or the feminization of the professions—all these and more find their roots to some extent or other in women’s tears and our difficulty in resisting them. So, this is a call to resistance.

I am going to show that the tyranny of women’s tears has at least a 200-year history in the Anglophone
world—I’m sure it’s much older than that, but I don’t have the hard evidence—and I’m also going to touch on recent research strongly suggesting that women’s tears affect men at a basic bio-chemical level, shutting down some regions of the male brain and activating others, a fact that tells us something about how men evolved historically to respond to women’s demands.

Ultimately, I will argue, the solution to the accountability gap must be to restore male authority in the family and in society because women themselves are not, generally speaking, interested in becoming (or perhaps able to become) more accountable by using rational means of argumentation rather than tears.

Read the rest in the transcript here . . .

Australia, Feminism, Law, Media, Men

The Presumption of Innocence Conference

Zali’s back for Lehrmann’s hat

Fireworks promised at Presumption of Innocence conference

Bettina Arndt Jul 26, 2024

Just a short news item….

Justice Michael Lee in his defamation judgement attracted much attention with his pronouncement that, “Having  escaped the lion’s den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat.” This smug comment was naturally greeted with glee by the salivating media, who revelled in Lee’s harsh decision to declare Lehrmann a rapist (on the balance of probabilities).  

Well, now Zali’s coming back for his hat! The colourful Sydney criminal lawyer Zali Burrows has announced she is presenting Bruce Lehrmann in his appeal. She’s quite a reputation for handling tough, high-profile cases.

But the really exciting news is Zali is now one of the speakers at our Restoring the Presumption of Innocence conference, to be held on August 31.

This promises to be a very lively session. Zali has called her talk – “The verdict goes to… the best actress.”

The frank-talking woman is keen to expose how feminist ideology is influencing our justice system, with complainants routinely referred to as “victims” and police investigations seen as irrelevant as women’s statements are deemed sufficient evidence to proceed to trial.  She will speak for many criminal lawyers who are alarmed by what’s happening. She’s a rare breed, with the courage to tell it as it is.

We’re updating the program – see the latest draft here. Details of some key speakers are being withheld and therw will be talks that aren’t live-streamed. Given the sensitive nature of some of the revelations at the conference, certain speakers need to avoid the hostile media attention that comes with appearing online.

Read the rest here . . .

Culture, Feminism, Law, Radicalism

“Misogyny” is now terrorism in Britain

It had to come and likely will get worse. Feminists have their claws into every part of our slowly collapsing western society. What is happening in Britain is on its way to Australia. (Postscript: It has arrived. See my comments above on Australia’s Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner Micaela Cronin above)

*****

The feminist, leftist British government is cracking down on free thinking men.

I don’t agree with everything said in this video. It’s of chief interest because it details the endless ridicule, insults, torment, abuse, mockery and misrepresentation men face daily.