Just Say No.

http://www.parkrdnews.com/women/feminists-time-ask-men-help/

It's an issue of boundaries. Feminists and women abuse the male mentality of providing and protecting. Their problems, their issues, they will never end. You can see it in the ever expanding definition of rape. You can see it in the imaginary problems they invent. 

Just say No. You don't owe some random woman out there on the interwebs one bit of consideration. That consideration is earned and quite frankly, it's time for women to stop thinking just of themselves, and take some responsibility.

Gotcha!

I'm reluctant to even address these types of "arguments". It's one Gotcha! after another, where they dredge up anything and everything in an attept to point the politically correct finger and justify their claims that men's rights is homophobic, transphobic, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

But.

I'll dissect the latest from Futrelle, since it's topical, and this Gotcha! mentality tends to irritate me to no end.

http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/06/19/why-is-a-voice-for-men-giving-a-platform-to-one-of-canadas-leading-opponents-of-gay-and-lesbian-rights/

Which rights? Right from the article,

Gay marriage isn’t a men’s right, according to AVFM conference speaker Anne Cools

I recognized this as a Gotcha! gambit from the start, and so did a little googling.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marb51.htm 

Of note:

Honorable senators, as I said before, I wish to register my strenuous opposition to Bill C-38. I believe that the issues have been falsely framed as Charter rights issues and equality issues. Marriage is not now, and never has been, a right. It has always been a grand privilege, with its origins as a sacrament of the church, governed by the canon law, received from the civil law into the common law. No sacrament of the church is now, or has ever been, a right.  

 Here, Anne Cools points out that Marriage of any kind is not a Right, but a privilege granted to religious unions.

This is a Gotcha! move, in an attempt to paint Anne Cools as a homophobe. A Post Hoc rationalization of their prejudices.

I may disagree with Anne Cools on some points. Personally, I think that the definition of marriage should be children. In a nutshell, I think that hetero and homosexual couples should be able to join in a civil union, and that union "graduates" to a marriage when children are born or adopted. A marriage should come with a complete set of obligations to those children.

But just because Anne Cools has a certain opinion, and also has a technical reason to object to gay marriage, doesn't mean she's against gay rights, and certainly not the homophobe that these Gotcha! arguments imply.

But there is no room with these people for debate or dissent. Agree or be cast down as the heretic.

I was raped of my Big Mac when they forgot it in the drive through.

The latest nuttery from Huffpo Women.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hayley-krischer/the-maleficent-rape-scene_b_5445974.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

Now, I am a fan of fairy tales. It is true that the original tales dealt with so-called Adult issues, since they were tales for everyone. It's only in modern times that fairy tales got relegated to the children's section of the library.

But this attempt to politicise  a modern interpretation of a fairy tale into an alegory specifically about certain rape and alleged rape cases to further the feminist agenda is pretty damn crass. Though one might say that that's been feminism's whole tactic all along. Call everything rape, because rape is the topic they can throw into a man's face to make him feel like shit for his gender, for being male. Ignore female rapists and male victims, ignore that rape incidence is dropping and has been dropping for decades,  rape is a tool for feminists to shame and control men.

It's too soon for men to be free.

As a group.

Leonardo DaVinci created many ingenieous designs for a flying machine... and none of them worked.
Not for lack of imagination, but for lack of the technology that allows a modern helicopter or airplane to fly. He didn't have the kinds of engines or materials to make his designs work in the real world.

Men are enslaved to their instincts to provide for and protect women. Moreso, they identify too strongly with women, base their identities and self worth on their service to women. For men to be able to free themselves from this, they need to be able to free themselves from it. A tautology. The technology does not exist. A few eccentrics, MGTOWs, will dream of the male emotional emancipation equivalent of DaVinci's flying machines,  but the mass of men, even MGTOW men, are simply waiting for the pendulum of female social acceptance to swing back to give them some measure of relief from women's constant attacks.

The end of MGTOW?

Erin Pizzey has noted that previous men's movements have failed due to infighting. From what I've seen following the MGTOW channels, it's happening there too. MGTOW criticizing MRAs, MRAs criticizing MGTOW, MGTOW criticizing each other. It's depressing at times. Debate is fine, people disagreeing is fine, but it seems like there's no real camraderie in the MGTOW movement. Men going their own way, and kicking each other in the shins on their way.

Is it the fate of any gathering of humans to devolve into infighting over social status and hierarchy?

Moar Harlock.

I've rediscovered this series, since watching it as a little kid. What's interesting is the 1978 series enemy was the Mazone, an alien species that resembled women. There's some interesting undertones lurking.