An open letter to NOW President Terry O’Neill

Dear Ms. O’Neill,

As the president of the National Organization for Women, you are in the national spotlight as a spokesperson and representative for feminist minded individuals across the nation, and arguably the planet.

It has long been asserted by many feminist icons that the ideals you support are rooted in the desire for equal opportunity and equal treatment under the law for women everywhere. Many self-proclaimed feminists have rejected the charge that feminism is driven by animosity toward men and the desire to foster female supremacy.

As a men’s activist who has long sought to bring attention to issues adversely affecting men and boys, I have frequently been instructed by feminists that my personal perception of feminism is off base. I have been told repeatedly that feminism is about, and only about, equality. I have also been informed on many occasions that feminist goals are ones that will also benefit men because they foster and embrace a more just and equal society. I would like to extend the opportunity to lend merit and credibility to those ideas.

Recently, information was made public about members of a feminist website known as Radfem Hub. This internet portal is one that hosts articles and opinions by such feminist notables as scholar Sheila Jeffreys and columnist Julie Bindle.

But a private forum on that site, run with the clear support and knowledge of its ownership, was discovered to contain frequent and egregious examples of hate speech that can only be considered to constitute a culture of hate. The discussion there included the promotion of murder, mass murder, both of children and adult males, eugenics, sexual mutilation and other depraved, criminal acts.  All of these ideas were furthered under the banner of feminism, the cause for which you work so actively.

These were not fringe radicals residing on the periphery of your movement. They were qualified individuals, holding important, often prestigious positions in their respective communities.

These include Pamela O’Shaughnessy, a bestselling novelist for Simon and Schuster, Kat Pinder, a community development coordinator for the City of Perth in Australia, Mary Syrett, a writer and member of the City of Kingston Arts Council in Ontario, Canada, Julie LeComte, a communications assistant for the French-Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Australia, Lorraine Allen, a special education teacher at The Center for Discovery Hurleyville, New York, and Laila Namdarkhan, who was instrumental in passing legislation in the U.K. Regarding the mental health of women in prisons.

All of these individuals were positively identified and their statements advocating criminal violence in support of feminist goals were documented. You can read the entire overview HERE.

This presents a very unfortunate and disturbing situation, but also a clear opportunity that may provide the silver lining to this cloud.

It gives you, Ms. O’Neill, a nationally recognized and credible authority on feminism and its agenda, the opportunity to help define what feminism is about to those who currently question it – and to distance yourself and your cause from these hateful individuals.

So I am writing to ask you, on behalf of the many thousands that will hear your answer, what is your position on this type of speech in the name of your cause? Do you reject and condemn these individuals and their statements, publicly and without reservation?

Do you plan to issue a statement demonstrating your objection to calls for violence in the name of feminist goals? Or, conversely, do you support these individuals, by action or omission, and their desire to inflict harm and death as a way to fulfill their political objectives?

Your answers to these questions will settle any lingering doubt about the state of modern feminism, just as your failure to answer will do the same.

Kind regards,

Paul Elam
A Voice for Men

[Addendum: This letter was originally addressed to Kim Gandy, who is the former president of NOW. Unfortunately, NOW had not updated her profile on their website and still had her bio saying she was president of the organization.]


Support us by becoming a member

AVFM depends on readers like you to help us pay expenses related to operations and activism. If you support our mission, please subscribe today.

Join or donate

Sponsored links

  • http://daddys.blogg.se Joakim Ramstedt

    Good one! Thumbs up.

  • ghebert

    Well, I guess it’s time for feminism to put its money where its mouth is.

    • DruidV

      As I await an answer from the feminazis, I will note that even the crickets have stopped chirping now.
      And so the deafening silence continues to shout it all out for us, loud and clear.

      • ghebert

        The crickets may have stopped chirping…but the tumbleweeds are still rollin’.

  • Zorro

    Elam knows how to swing a pen!

    Still, we won’t hear diddly from the femNazis on this. Just like the liberal peaceniks who hated on GWB have nothing to say about Bambi’s military adventures.

  • Roland3337

    Wouldn’t it be great if we could get a membership list of N.O.W. and see if any of these sexist, bigoted monsters from RadFem Hub are card carrying members?

    The mid boggles at the possibilities.

    • Zarathos022

      Somehow, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if they did.

    • scatmaster

      Wouldn’t it be great if we could get a membership list of N.O.W. and see if any of these sexist, bigoted monsters from RadFem Hub are card carrying members?

      I don’t think if but how many.

      • Zorro

        Precisely. If you hate blacks, you join the Klan. If you hate Jews, you join the skinheads or other swastika-obsessed hate-mongering zombioid cult.

        If you think because you have a clam between your legs means you are the penultimate accomplishment in mammalian biology, you join the N.O.W.

        Count on it. All American femiNazis are card-carrying N.O.W. members.

        Both Betty Friedan and Dr. William Farrell (3 time NYC NOW chapter president) quit the N.O.W. because it had become a male-hate fest.

        They’re all members. I promise you.

        • Whitney

          +1 for your use of penultimate!

        • sewneo

          I am not sure I understand your use of penultimate here. I used to think the word meant “best of the best”, until my younger brother pointed out it means “second to last”. I thought he was wrong. I googled it. He’s almost never wrong.

          So do you mean that these women think they are the “second to last” because of their clam status? Or did you mean that they think they are the best of the best? Thanks.

          • Zorro

            Okay. I work a 12-hour night shift. When I get home, I pour myself a series of stiff drinks to help me sleep through the day. I was reading Scatmaster’s post when I said to myself, “I think I’ll have just one more,” thus making the drink in my hand the penultimate cocktail of the morning.

            And, being hammered, I typed what went through my mind.

            You’re lucky I spelled it right.

        • http://www.manwomanmyth.com Perseus

          They are all members, and They Are All (for all intents and practical purposes) Like That.

  • Zarathos022

    I’ll be keeping my fingers crossed on this one, Mr. Elam.

  • justicer

    Lol. If I were writing a letter to NOW, it would have one word in it: NEVER.
    (sorry, couldn’t resist)

  • Kimski

    Excellent, Mr. Elam.
    I can hardly wait for the reply, if we ever get one.

    Might also have been somewhat interesting to hear where SHE thinks feminism has done anything for men, besides raising more misery, but that’s beside the point.

    I get that one from time to time, and when I ask for examples I’m usually just met with a blank stare, and you can almost SEE the hamster rattling around in it’s cage..
    -I usually follow up with a: ‘-Thank you for proving my point!’ -to that stare.

    • http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

      Don’t count on a reply, at least not a favorable one. Several years ago Glenn Sacks called on NOW to support a boycott of department stores selling the t-shirt “Boys are Stupid: Throw Rocks at Them.” The reply from NOW was that they didn’t have time to become involved in t-shirt campaigns.


      • DruidV

        I personally followed that story and I can tell you it was pretty sickening.
        In fact, learning from mr. Sacks about the existence of tee shirts which touted the joys of throwing rocks at stupid boys was for me, one of the countless straws that eventually broke the camel’s proverbial back.

        What ever happened to Glenn Sacks, btw?

        Shot for dissent, or something?

        • http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

          “What ever happened to Glenn Sacks, btw?”

          Not sure, I think he still heads up Fathers and Families, but I don’t know if he’s still on the air. I never really listened to talk radio.


        • Demonspawn

          He lost control of his commenters (we were saying things he didn’t like and refused to debate points counter to the agenda he was pushing) so he closed the comments section of his blog and deleted all previous comment sections. Not long after that, traffic to his site dried up and he quit blogging there to focus on F&F.

      • Kimski

        Then I’d be asking them, if they would mind if I were to start a sale of t-shirts going “Girls Go Crazy Later: Lock Them Up Now!”, as my next move.

        -Let the whining and the uproar commence.

        • http://www.mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/ Masculist Man


          That is cool quote that I would love to have a t shirt.

          • Kimski

            I was actually thinking about having one made, after really seeing what I wrote. :)
            Be my guest, you’re welcome to use it as you please.

      • MrStodern

        The reply from NOW was that they didn’t have time to become involved in t-shirt campaigns.

        Bet if I made some “Girls Are Lame, Don’t Buy Them Drinks” T-shirts they’d have time to protest that. Which would be hilarious, given the very popular opinion among feminists that getting girls drunk to have sex with them is wrong and should be a crime.

  • Primal

    Wonder what Mr. ManBoobz, herself, has to say about this.

    • Kimski

      In that case, I’m pretty sure the hamster goes into N2O-powered overdrive.

    • andybob

      Whatever his keepers tell him to say, of course. He’s a mongrel, but a very well-trained one.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      Ah Primal mate, you do of course realise that when you stick that man’s name into an anagram generator you get this:

      “A vile turd fled.”

      So I’m betting between chicken leg munching we’ll here sweet F A.

      • Roland3337

        “A vile turd fled.”

        Spit out some good home brew on my keyboard with that one.

        Thankfully I have 750 ml left.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

          Sorry ’bout that. I owe you one.

          Not paying for new keyboard though.

    • lensman

      The way Futrelle and the “Good Feminists” are going to treat this is going to be pretty much the same way they treat female child-molesting teachers. That is, the same way Jack T. Chick treats the Peppered Moth, the same way Young Earth Creationists treat astronomical data and the same way ideologues and other brainwashed human beings generally treat things that don’t fit with their skewed view of the world: by sweeping it under a rug and pretending (and even claiming) that they don’t exist.

      • lensman

        It seems I made a poor choice of words…

        “Quietly ignore it and constantly change the subject hoping it will one day go away” is far more correct than what I wrote above.

        • Primal

          “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.”

      • Whitney

        Thanks a lot! Now you got me posting there again. Damn! It’s like a gambling addiction. I feel dirty and need a shower.

        My Post:


        “The worst crime to be falsely accused of is probably murder.”

        I’m a hit and run so don’t bother to try and debate this with me. Perhaps another member would like to take the Devil’s Advocate role and have an honest debate without being an echo chamber.

        In order to be accused of murder, there has to actually be a dead body. You must then link the dead body to the perpetrator (Actus Reus). For murder you then need to prove that the perpetrator had a guilty mind (Mens Rea) i.e. intended to kill the victim. Rape is more like attempted murder in the fact that it doesn’t have to have actually happened in order to be accused of it.

        Remember that Rape is one of the only crimes in which either the accused or the accuser has be believed. One or the other must have the onus put on them. If you put the onus on the accuser you’re re-victimizing the victim. If you put the onus on the accused, you’re violating the constitution.

        My personal favourite is “attempted rape”. Attempting (mens rea) without proving an actual crime took place (actus reus) to do something that may or may not have happened. Really, if he stopped was there actually going to be a rape? If he was stopped then who stopped him and what were his intentions?

    • TigerMan

      Ha ha ha – good point – I will mosy over there and ask ’em! 😉

    • Whitney

      Stop bringing up that name! :) Every time I go there I get so angry at the twisted logic of the place.

  • C.A. George

    Great work. Hopefully Ms. Gandy is prompt with her reply.

  • BobbyL

    My prediction of her reply. Chirp chirp——Chirp. Either that or MASSIVE LIES.

  • keyster

    My favority NOW bit are the pleas to Congress to “keep Social Security solvent because the majority of seniors that need these benefits the most are women…”
    … failing to mention–because men die sooner!

    • MrStodern

      Yes, because it is up to all us to do all that we can to ensure that old ladies don’t end up living off cat food because they weren’t smart enough to save their money instead of wasting it on stuff to make themselves look hot in order to attract a man to take care of them, a man they are additionally too short-sighted to realize is going to die before they will, thanks much to being worked like a damn dog. Minus the luxury of being humanely put to sleep before a horribly painful death can take them, of course, as dogs are far more deserving of that than men.

      Don’t you know that, man? 😛

      • keyster

        If only male life expectancy were a “social construct”, we could “tear down the barriers of gender inequality”.

        There’s one thing worse than men dying, and that’s women that might be suffering somehow; that might be in pain, fearful or uncomfortable.

        Until the women are made to feel safe and secure, the men will simply have to fend for themselves. Really sorry guys.

        • Whitney

          I’m all for taking care of ourselves. Being a libertarian, I don’t want the same special interest that women get. I think that they should be removed as a special interest group and fight for a living like the rest of us dogs.

          Equal Opportunity != Equal Outcome.

    • http://www.manwomanmyth.com Perseus

      Little makes my stomach convulse more than what you pointed out here, keyster, and the analogues in the UK and elsewhere.

  • eyallior


  • 4thtroika

    I’d love to see her response myself, but somethings telling me not to hold my breath.

  • andybob

    Well played, Mr Elam. Every outcome is a victory won on our behalf. Feminists don’t handle accountability very well. They tend to self-implode like hamsters in a microwave.

    There is zero possibility that Ms Gandy will condemn Radfemhub. She will either ignore your request or issue some vague form letter praising equality and wishing you a nice day. Both responses will expose the hypocrisy and moral negligence that undermines everything that feminism claims for itself.

    NOW is saturated with the kind of radical feminists who lap up vile man-hating extremism for breakfast. I wonder how many hubsistas pepper Ms Gandy’s Christmas card list. She’s probably one herself. Now wouldn’t that be the best Christmas present ever?

  • Paul Elam

    Addendum: This letter was originally addressed to Kim Gandy, who is the former president of NOW. Unfortunately, NOW had not updater her profile on their website and still had her bio saying she was president of the organization.

    • MrStodern

      Trying to hide from us, eh? Not surprising. We’re very scary, us MRAs, with all our talk of poisoning the water supply so that only people of our gender are born, and throwing little kids of the opposite sex out of unopened windows, and laughing at the mutilation of the other gender’s genitalia, and…

      Oh wait, we’re not the ones who do that. Feminists are. Huh… So why don’t people like us then? Seems kind of strange to me…

    • TigerMan

      This is their twitter account “NationalNOW” in case you didn’t (or others here) know it :)

    • BobbyL

      I guess it was too much to ask the poor dear who runs the site to EARN HER MONEY. To point this out is misogyny of course. I must be punished.

  • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

    Paul I’m telling you that your letter is a lovely slice of good temper fairness and generosity of good intention. It’s a delight to read and it brings me to a saying we all know of.

    “Pearls before Swine”. Well I wouldn’t say it applies here, but I would feel more comfortable tweaking the concept for better accuracy to “Diamonds before Dung Beetles.”

    Now this is not to say your talents have been misspent at all, no way.

    There will be a great noise by the response whether it’s thunderous applause or the louder hullabaloo of silence.

    There cannot be anything satisfying in between as this would be muted agreement or a delayed response of any kind. Either way you’ll not, we’ll not be disappointed as illuminating data will come of it.

    This data of course will be the true reflection of the real profile of the feminist movement regardless of it’s style of ‘mainstream’ mildness or it’s style of ‘Valerie’ madness.

    I simply love it and thank you for this joy before Christmas joy.

    On a side note:
    What are your thoughts on this, I mean do you think there will be some sort of genuine response that would let so many down, or do you think that there will be a barking silence from Ms. O’Neill and her minions that sail on her feminist propaganda peddled rivulets of diarrhea ?

    • Primal

      Yes, the feminists fuck their OWN shit up better than anyone else ever can. All that’s needed is to hand them back their honey bucket back to em and watch what they do with it. No need to become all stinky and filthy fucking their shit up for em though.

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

        Beautifully said. A thumbs up from me to you :)

    • Roland3337

      Dr. F, I cannot speak for Paul in this, but my prediction is that there will be crickets. And such crickets will only give a louder bang for the next round. And the one after that.

      Such is how artillery sounds when your on the side of truth, rather than that of ideology.

      Time, truth and ammo are on our side.

  • mongo

    A little off topic, but apparently a woman protestor has caught the business end of a cop’s truncheon in Egypt, and is now world news. The Arab spring is how many month’s old now? And finally a woman caught a policeman’s baton. And we’re supposed to be OUTRAGED?

    Does this mean it was only men who have been beaten, tortured and martyred up until now? After how many thousands?

    Pardon me if I pass on the anger routine, but I’m all angered out.

    • http://www.manwomanmyth.com Perseus

      The objects of my empathy are proportionate to those suffering- thus overwhelming male. Female, you are not special. You are not.

      With fraternal love to all my brother suffering.

    • Primal

      Can’t agree more but we also need to keep things in perspective. As long as feminists can point to poster children like this lovely specimen: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2011/12/man-arrested-in-elevator-torching-says-victim-owed-him-money.html and as long as a younger woman is never caught with accelerant in an elevator spraying an old man down over an unpaid debt, they will be able to grind the VAWA axe with relative ease. Somehow we need to deny em easy opportunities to tar men for all the evil in the world and that begins with taking this kind of appalling violence very very seriously.

  • Roland3337

    Wildly OT, but I have an idea that I’d like to float:

    Our objective is growth. We need a critical mass on our side. Someone in the MRM once wrote a post in some kind of forum (maybe here, or in reddit…I think it was Karma MGTOW), recommending that we start to make our own small posters in the form of sticky notes in places that men are likely to see: above urinals, for example.

    Here’s a similar idea: Making a custom rubber stamp with some kind of MRM message on it, directing someone to a wide variety of places (i.e., here, the Spearhead, False Rape Society, etc.) and stamping it on the paper currency in your wallet?

    Think of it…money is not a poster that can be torn down by an angry feminist. It is not something that can be thrown in the trash. It will continue to circulate in perpetuity until the bill is taken out of circulation. And a custom rubber stamp can be made for like…$5-10 USD?

    And how many paper bills do you guys have in your wallets right now? How many will you have tomorrow? And where will they go? Who will see them during their useful lives? Under what circumstances?

    If they land in the paws of feminists, what will they do? Throw them away? I think not. They will ignore the stamp and use them and then pass them on to a man that might need to read what the MRM has to say?

    My only worry is that the websites that are cited on such stamps, might be on the receiving end of some kind of trouble for the destination websites cited.

    Here in America, some of us are familiar with the “Where’s George?” bills that are similarly stamped. Yet those folks are not getting into trouble with the American Secret service.

    • mongo

      Ain’t a single note leaving my wallet without a thought written on it. It’s the one piece of paper I can be sure will be read. Good thinking.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      I wrote a mates phone number on a twenty dollar note once for a lark. He said he kept on receiving unusual calls for about six months and then it stopped abruptly.

      This was in the days when paper notes were in fact made of paper.

      Funny, I hadn’t thought of that for many years until tonight.

  • Skeptic

    Sorry Paul,
    Ms O’Niel will be too busy to answer your well worded letter.
    She’s exhausted too as she’s been frantically helping draft new urgent legislation which seeks to deal with our rising star called the Men’s Rights Movement.

    The following bills were introduced by the Femocrat party in an emergency session of the house of representatives today –

    The Presumption of Future Divorce Act.

    Marriage law is now changed such that signing the marriage certificate brings forward the wholesale transfer of assets from husband to wife that more usually takes place upon the future divorce.
    The new Presumption of Future Divorce Act states that in order to make any future divorce more efficient, men must transfer all bank accounts, businesses and property into the wife’s name on signing of the marriage certificate. It is hoped that this new legislation will bring down the cost and stress of divorce and allow women full control of her husbands assets immediately, without the extended delays common with the divorce process.
    Businesses celebrated the new law by offering all newly-wed women a special pampering weekend for only $5000 (specially reduced from $5100) and an unlimited line of credit at fashion stores. They said the take up of the offers has been phenomenal. One newly married woman exclaimed: ”I could never have afforded this without this great change in the law. My husband would never spend like this and the financial freedom I now enjoy can only strengthen our marriage.”
    When asked, husbands-to-be shrugged and cited that it was not something that bothered them because: “divorce is something that happens to other people, and in any event, my wife is not like that.”

    The DNA Contributors Act.

    Government today formalized what has always been unofficially practiced and enforced by the family court and stripped all fathers of legally presumed parental rights.
    The new law means that all fathers are now officially renamed DNA Contributors and their sole legal right is the responsibility to pay for their child’s upbringing. Women’s groups said that this was a perfectly fair arrangement as “no mother would deny a man access to his child if he was a decent DNA Contributor”, and it would greatly simplify custody hearings because such hearings would simply no longer be necessary.
    “Formalizing the arrangement between mothers and sperm donor in this way, makes it much easier for mothers to deal with DNA Contributors who are not behaving as she would like”, said Charlotte Harpy of the campaign group ‘Mother Knows Best’. “And it also makes it easier for the DNA Contributors, because they now know ahead of time that they will fail to see their children if they go to court, rather than kidding themselves over years and years of court appearances, that there might be a chance.
    Everybody wins.”
    DNA Contributor groups did not offer a comment as they were too busy designing a logo for their new name: ‘DNA Contributors 4 Justice’.

    The Legal Human Castration Act.

    From today, it is legally permissible for a wife to castrate her husband or boyfriend if she has suffered abuse from him in the past. The evidence required to prove that she received abusive treatment from the castrated spouse, is a sworn statement from the woman that he was indeed abusive and/or made her cry.
    The minimum required level of abuse for her to be acquitted, is set at shouting and/or door-slamming. Dame Brenda Hale was also said to offer that: “periods of ignoring her for longer than 60 minutes and the purchase of one or more unwanted gifts for the woman would also count as abuse severe enough to justify castration.”
    Further, the man would not be permitted to ask that she actually prove that he was abusive, because the Legal Human Castration Act presumes that in enduring the unpleasant task of severing his testicles, she has suffered enough.

    The All Female University Act.

    All-female universities are to open now that so few men are doing well enough to attend university.
    It is thought that bringing proper focus to women – who now make up the vast majority of students – would help bring equality to education by delivering more appropriate tuition to women, who are continually denied this when men occupy the same campus.
    University doors and entryways can now officially be painted pink, rather than just metaphorically and university staff have come out fully in favor of the new measures. As Samantha Smughead, professor of Gender Studies remarked: “Women will finally be able to express themselves more freely with the patriarchal agents removed from the classroom and, anyway, men tend to make the campus look scruffy.”
    It is also thought that incidences of campus sexual assault and rape should be much reduced, seeing as the only men on campus will be janitors and gardeners. All such staff will be required to work in pairs and made to wear police monitored electronic tags. Additionally, an armed female supervisor will be close by, ready to respond in case of any attempts of sexual harassment by the men, or even worse, any attempt to enroll.
    Women’s groups lauded the proposals and it is expected to pass into law without opposition.
    Many men’s groups could not be reached for comment, as they’re getting ready for a big football weekend.

    The Women’s Prison Closure Act.

    Women’s prisons are to formally close their doors to women with immediate effect. Existing female prisons will be converted to men’s prisons after being renovated to make them less comfortable.
    The government has fully adopted the proposals put forward by the Women’s Justice Task Force in 2011 and has decided that prison is not the right punishment for female criminals. Women will now not face the arduousness of trials for their crimes and will instead face a three-woman panel to decide what level of community service she will need to serve, dependent on the severity her crime.
    Murder will carry a maximum sentence of 3 years service, which might consist of working most weekends at shelters for battered women or similar severe punishment. She will also be required to write an essay, explaining why what she did was wrong.

    The Presumption of Abuse Act

    Murder of a husband or boyfriend, however, will carry much less severe sentences than other murders under the new Presumption of Abuse Act, which affords women the legal presumption of acting in self defence whenever she kills an intimate male partner. This will save the court’s time and tax payer’s money, by fast-tracking women who kill their male partners and sparing them the trauma of a long investigation or trial, or having to demonstrate a syndrome.
    Men’s groups sent several emails in protest, saying that this made them “second-class citizens”.
    The President responded in a recent interview saying that men needed to: “stop whining and man-up! Women would not go back in the box and if you are unlucky enough to be killed or castrated by your spouse, then you undoubtedly deserved it.”

    The Extended Abortion Act

    Women can now no longer be prosecuted for killing their children, provided that the child is younger then 3 years old.
    The new Late Abortion Act allows women to extend her existing license to kill a child, from the current maximum 24 weeks, to up to the new maximum of 3 years after birth, providing she can find a women’s advocate to testify that she is afflicted by one of the 216 distinct syndromes that are proven to only affect women.
    It is expected that most women will still use the favorite Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy when they murder their babies. However, others are expected to try out the newer Abdication of Responsibility Syndrome and Temporary Loss of Adulthood Syndrome.
    Still others, might go for the brand new Comprehensive Female Multi – Spectrum Generic Temporary Loss of Any and All Responsibility Disorder Syndrome (by Proxy), which is a cutting-edge catch-all syndrome, to help women who cannot be adequately protected from punishment by using one of the other 215 syndromes.
    “With this newly invented safety syndrome”, says its inventor Beverley Simpleton (known in academia affectionately, as BS), “It is hoped that no woman who is unfortunate enough to have killed her children, might suffer the indignity of being punished for it.”
    A house committee erupted into laughter at the idea that men’s psychology should be investigated to find out if men might have equivalent syndromes to explain their murders of children or spouses, saying that it was: “a sickening attempt to subvert justice by hiding behind faux psychology.”
    “It is misogynistic attitudes like that”, added one Congress member, “that are holding women back and preventing real equality.”

    The Rape Allegation Act

    The burden of proof in rape cases has been officially moved onto the accused man in rape cases and now, any women who claims to have suffered rape, has only to identify the rapist to secure prosecution.
    Investigations to establish prima face guilt are no longer required and nor is any forensic evidence. Following the lead of Swedish law on being charged with rape, it is now wholly up to the man to prove he did not commit the crime.
    Women’s groups heralded this decision as a victory for common sense, citing the well established fact that a woman “would never lie about rape” and that this saved the tax payer money at a time when we can ill afford to spend it “defending men from crimes they undoubtedly must have committed”.
    Men who find themselves unable to prove that a rape did not occur, will now receive a mandatory 20 year prison term without need for an expensive trial. A win-win for the national economy and women’s rights.
    When asked, many men said that this “didn’t seem right, somehow”, but then again, “it wouldn’t happen” to them and there were more important things in life, such as “the upcoming regional playoffs and breasts.”

    The Sexual Harassment Protection Act

    Sexual harassment law received a boost today when a tribunal ruled that a woman could be sexually harassed by an unborn baby boy.
    The woman, who remains nameless for legal reasons, claimed that she felt and somehow just knew that the unborn baby boy, in only his second trimester, was: “looking at me through his mothers belly and seemed to be undressing me with his eyes”.
    The distraught complainant has received undisclosed damages, and the unborn boy has been pre – expelled from school and placed on the national sex offenders registry.
    In another case, a woman has won 5 million dollars from McCrapalds restaurants by claiming that she was sexually harassed by a customer more than six years ago, when he ordered a burger and said: “Hey, you have really nice eyes”.
    The unnamed victim has been under medical supervision ever since the traumatic incident and cannot sleep due to having recurrent nightmares.
    McCrapalds has stated that they would be taking all necessary steps to save women from compliments and all unwanted attention from men by building special screens in all restaurants, so that no one could see anyone else and also installing audio equipment that would automatically screen out all words that did not involve ordering burgers, nuggets or fries.
    Male customers will have to email their orders from the front of the store and robot arms will hand the food to them through hatches to avoid any possibility of female workers experiencing unwanted physical contact with male customers.
    Female customers, however, would enter through a different restaurant entrance and order direct with staff as usual.
    Women’s groups claimed that this was an important victory for the rights of women in the workplace, who should be able to work “without fear of being spoken to or looked at by men in any way at all.”
    Men’s groups, headed by contributors at the USA Mangina Project agreed that the rights of women should be paramount no matter what small inconveniences befell men.
    “To disagree with such an arrangement might cast the men’s movement in a bad light”, opined the folks at Reddit. “We are not here to upset women or stand in the way of women’s rights no matter what they demand. We stand in support of men’s rights as long as they come behind women’s, children’s, animals and plants rights. We know our place.”
    Women’s groups seemed quite surprised at this and only added: “They took the words right out of our mouths.”

    The Women’s Health Act

    The government today agreed that health spending for women, currently eight times that of men, and up to 100 times that of men in some areas, was not sufficiently addressing the health needs of women.
    The Minister for Women and Girls stated that: “it is the priority of any modern society to invest in the well-being of women. It is abominable that women are not receiving adequate funding towards this aim, while men continue to receive funds that could be better spent on women.” To this end, the government announced today, that all spending on male health will cease with immediate effect, with all funding re-allocated to female health.
    Spending on female health would receive a further boost with the diversion of funding currently used to reduce workplace deaths, suicides and homelessness. Women’s groups celebrated this, stating that: “as women are barely affected by these other issues, it is only right that the money should instead go into female health where it would save women’s lives.”

    The Pension Reform Act

    Women sure have it rough.
    Women’ groups were delighted today as the government reversed their decision to bring women’s retirement age into line with the age for men: “This shows that government is finally listening to the needs of women who suffer discrimination at every turn.”
    Instead of equalizing the retirement age at 67 for both sexes, men, who have worked until 65 years of age, will now be required to work until age 75 to make up the shortfall in taxation for funding women’s health, whilst women stay at their current retirement age of 60. With men’s life expectancy currently being 76 years, women’s groups were quick to point out that men retiring at age 75 still afforded the average man “the luxury of a full year of retirement to enjoy with their families.
    What more could a man want?”
    A spokeswoman for women’s advocate group ‘Women have it Rough: Always Have and Always Will’ said: “Whilst it’s true that men have for the last 70 years, worked until age 65 whilst women have retired at age 60; and whilst it’s true that disproportionate spending on women’s health means that women live longer and therefore have a long retirement, whereas men die soon after retirement; and whilst it’s also true that it is mainly men who contribute the bulk of money to pay for retirement benefits that only women live to enjoy, the fact remains that women should be getting a better deal.”
    The women’s group ‘Women, Women and Only Women’ added:“The fact that women are female must be of overriding significance to any civilized society. Women deserve more.”
    Feminist men’s groups said that they would much prefer that men didn’t have to work right up to the average age of male death in order to fund women’s retirement. However, they accepted that it’s a man’s duty to do whatever he can for women, particularly because “women have it so bad in our society.”
    In a rare show of solidarity with men, women’s groups fully agreed.

    I’ll keep you posted on further developments.

    • MrStodern

      The really fucked up part: Feminists would love to do every last one of those things.

      Every. Last. One.

    • Whitney

      The Manboobz act:

      David Futrelle gets laid all the time by hoards of grateful feminists who he fought for. They shower him with gifts (donated by government) and double/triple team him every night.

      Feminists will revel in his manboobliness and he will be allowed to sacrifice one ungodly MRA to the fiery pits of hell while he gets his Johnson polished by three or more feminists at a time.

      The feminists are all men.

    • James Williams

      Excellent prose. The scary thing is that may all become true if the fems have it all their own way.

  • http://whatmenthinkofwomen.blogspot.com/ Christianj

    Skeptic, that is too good to not circulate. with your permission, I would like to post this on my blog. Top effort..

    • scatmaster

      Here is the website I first saw it on Christian


    • Skeptic

      Actually ChristianJ I confess I ‘pilfered’ the vast majority of it from manwomanmyth blog and adapted it ever so slightly as I thought it seemed so fitting.
      I’m sure as it’s for the cause of Men’s Rights there would be no objection to circulating it further though.

  • Alfred E

    Which is it Ms O’Neil? Spits or Swallows? LOL

    Thanks for putting them in this dilemma Paul. It will be interesting to watch them squirm.

  • TruthInAdvertising

    Q: “How come ‘all men’ get blamed for the misogyny of a few, yet no prominent Feminist ever calls out genuine anti-male bigotry?”

    A: “Not All Feminists Are Like That!”

    Q: “Why does Feminism portray itself as an equality movement, while supporting a great deal of supremacist attitudes and initiatives?”

    A: “Not All Feminists Are Like That!”

    Q: “How come every time someone points out a substantive criticism of Feminism, Feminists say ‘Not All Feminists Are Like That!’ ?”

    A: “Not All Feminists Are Like That!”

  • Stu

    Three possible responses may come from this, and all of them rubbish.

    1. No response to us at all, probably followed by some bad press on the MRM in their publications.

    2. Respond to us, with the usual regurgitated feminist rubbish about how women have been oppressed for thousands of years blah blah blah….just harmless repressed women blowing off steam, and a bunch of lame recycled excuses. Write anti MRM articles in their publications.

    3. Respond with the claim that Radical Feminists are a fringe group and not real feminists at all…..condemn the actions of these few non-feminists…..and than forget about it…….write anti MRM articles in their publications.

    • Kimski

      4. Blames the entire MRM movement for making this become public knowledge and tells us all to ‘man up’, because it is not meant to be taken literally and is really just a couple of prominent feminists having a good laugh.

      • MrStodern

        Yes, because joking about the slow extermination of males is so damn hilarious.

      • http://www.shrink4men.com/ Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

        5. Accuse the MRM of stalking them and violating their “privacy.” The phrase “creepy men” may be employed and, perhaps a new term, like “Gotcha Activism.”

        My bet is that this will be ignored. Just like Lisalyn Jacobs (the NOW attorney and VAWA counsel) who assaulted Ben Vonderheide/Daddy Justice in the US Senate hallway was ignored.

        • Whitney

          Has she answered those charges yet?

          OT, but relevant to your site, the Verizon Monster video has been taken down. We can actually vote with our wallets!

          MRA voting block!

  • Truyardy

    The letter will go unanswered and the media will do their best to keep this under wraps.

    • DruidV


  • keyster

    The irony of trying to publicize the fact that there are radical feminist groups seeking to “Eradicate Males”, is that you yourself are viewed as radical, extremist and hateful.

    You’d think the mere fact that these wymyn’s groups exist would make for a very compelling news story, but even the media wouldn’t touch it, especially in the US.

    That’s how deep their control of the dialectic goes.

    • http://www.shrink4men.com/ Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

      Projection. It’s not just a room in the back of a theater.

  • Jade Michael

    “A” for effort on this one, Paul. Too bad feminists only respond to men’s queries when they can feign feeling “threatened”. Cordiality and respectfully providing points of interest to them goes unheard and unnoticed. It doesn’t further their cause to paint us as brute animals when we demonstrate couth. If their rabidity doesn’t stand a chance of being satiated in a victimized retort, nothing will come of it.

    Go ahead O’Neill – I dare you to prove me wrong.

  • http://www.manwomanmyth.com Perseus

    Oh, that Pamela O’Shaughnessy..

    • scatmaster

      I see someone used my amateurish paint skills and added red eyes and a meme. Well done.

      • Kimski

        What are you talking about, scatmaster?
        -Is this not the way she looks???

  • justicer

    Pyongyang, PRK. North Korea today announced that Terry O’Neil was being offered the presidency-for-life of that Asian dictatorship.
    Ms O’Neil is the ruling chairperson of the US feminist group Nation Organization of Women (NOW). NOW has been a leading advocate for female supremacy in the USA for several years.
    “As the World Leader in Progressive State Thinking,” read the communiqué from Pyongyang’s Interim Directorate of State Power, “we hail both NOW and Mr. (sic) Terry O’Neil. We note his (sic) lifelong commitment to Party unity and Correct Thinking, and NOW’s use of State organs, in the fight to provide Leadership to the People. We now urge progressive Koreans residing in the USA to send Terry O’Neil to the Motherland to fulfil his (sic) destiny.”
    The announcement produced a flurry of comment and speculation in government and academic circles around the globe. Speaking for the Swedish Academy for Feminism, its president, Dr. Welsh Onhimm, was cautious, but happy. It was, said Dr. Onhimm, regrettable that Korea did not correctly identify Ms O’Neil’s gender, assuming the word “his” is masculine in Korean, she added. “But what does not surprise us,” she continued, “is the focus of this decision. Korea is the Beacon of Progressive Stalinism and the last one standing; it could not have chosen any other than a Western feminist as its new Leader.”

    • Dannyboy

      Will Ms O’Neil be filling in as N Korea’s top Elvis impersonator as well just like Kim Jong?

      • justicer

        Yes, Dan, long as she doesn’t step on anyone’s Blue Swede Shoes.

        • Dannyboy


  • Dannyboy

    Great Letter Paul,
    I am hopeful that N.O.W. will reply or issue a statement distancing themselves from radfem but it is highly unlikely.
    To do this would be admitting that women do have violent thoughts and or tendencies. Never fear through the magic of femoganda I am sure somehow, someway it will be the mens fault why these women engaged in hate mongering. ( Presto chango fembot rearango and there you have it its the patriarchy’s fault. )
    Next item on the agenda for N.O.W. fund-raising to save hate mongers from accountability please won’t you give generously

  • Zorro

    Not really OT so much, it seems:

    Proof beyond a doubt that teh wimminz are more loving, empathetic and justice-minded than teh menz:


    Women are like anacondas: when they hug you, you generally end up dead.

    • justicer

      And this one is even more savory, since it involves 3 women charged with killing one toddler, and the accused include the little girl’s mother:

    • MrStodern

      Women are like anacondas: when they hug you, you generally end up dead.

      Well, at least you get to feel their breasts up against you one last time before they thrust the knife in your back.

      Of course, women have to LIKE you for them to hug you in such a way. Otherwise they do the lean-in thing, especially if they’re stacked. I always get the lean-in.

  • James Williams

    A well written letter. I suspect that you will get a politician’s reply that is bland in content (if she replies at all). Rad fems regard us as annoying insects that are out of touch with their religion. They have the power, the media and the money in their control compared to our minnow sized resistence. Many men instinctively oppose feminism, but make the mistake that it comes about from such women not getting enough sex from us. Other men see nothing wrong and see it as their duty to support feminism as it appeals to their protective side. Some of the most serious grassroots resistance comes from mothers of sons who realize the abhorent lies that the movement belches out actually harms their own children. I believe there is probably more hatred of feminism by women than by men.

  • Rper1959

    Excellent Paul, but still no response from Ms O’Neill hey? She probably to busy getting ready for the expected surge in domestic violence over the festive season?

  • http://forsakeneagle.blogspot.com/ ForsakenEagle

    Let’s see what they have to say about this. Give them time, they are none too sure of why we feel RadFem is a problem.

  • http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/ St. Estephe

    NOW is about power, right? The supreme gender would never misuse power. That’s what we learn in our mandatory gender indoctination courses in college, right? So let’s look at what a notable woman of great power had to say about the subject. This is from a collection of 5 maxims attributed to Taitu Betu, Empress of Abyssinia (1851-1918):

    “If you would gain a throne and hold it, fear not to make of human skulls thy stepping stones.”

    For the rest of her caring and sharing maxims see

    This post will also give you a link to the story of Taitu’s impressive serial killing carrer. I wonder, is the wisdom of Taitu perhaps included in NOW’s sacred texts?

  • td9red

    Gender studies is mandatory in colleges, now?

    • James Williams

      Not yet with all courses, but with those wishing to do social studies type courses, it forms a key part of the curriculum.

  • Howard26

    Have we heard anything from Der Fuhrer, I mean the President?