I quit

Dear colleague, I quit

Dear Colleague,

Due to your recent admission to me that you are an adherent of the ideology of feminism, I regret to inform you that our association as co-workers, colleagues, friends and team-mates is hereby discontinued.

Although it may be the case that you are, individually a well intended, thoughtful, and humane person, your acceptance and defence of feminism signals an undeniable danger to my personal safety, a threat to my career, a danger to family and to my future.

In all likelihood you probably regard my expressed caution as hyperbole or paranoid fantasy. If so, I consider that a good sign that you are rational, albeit misinformed. On the other hand, you might respond outwardly to this letter with open accusations of hyperbole and paranoia, simply for effect, without your own conviction behind such accusation. In either case, this isn’t a negotiation, it’s a goodbye.

However, what remains is an attempt to explain with as much clarity as possible, the reason.

In feminism’s self-descriptive rhetoric, it is touted variously as “equality for women”, “the radical notion that women are people” and sometimes as “women’s rights”. These characterizations portray a benign movement to which no well-adjusted person could object. You may even believe these descriptions to be true. In fact, if we believe these slogans, then objection to, or opposition to feminism must logically be equivalent to hatred of women, or if not hatred, then at least disdain for women’s basic human rights. They are very powerful slogans. Unfortunately, they are not true.

What feminism says it is through self-descriptive rhetoric, and what it demonstrates through organized action are two entirely different things.

Assuming for now that you are, or believe yourself to be a decent and good person; you likely see feminism through the lens of that ideology’s common description. This is understandable and logical. You both identify as a feminist, and are in the sexual demographic for which feminism claims to care.

I, on the other hand, am not in the demographic for which feminism claims to advocate, and so quite naturally I see it from another angle. Obviously, I am familiar with the ideology’s self-descriptive language. How could I not be? I grew up, as you did, submerged in a culture of feminism. My mother was part of the second wave, and I was fed the talking points from infancy onward. Please don’t delude yourself that I am somehow ignorant of the details, or that I operate from incomplete understanding. I was raised by a feminist to be a feminist and it was not until late in my life I discarded much of my lifetime’s accumulated feminist point of view.

But as I mentioned, I’m male, and therefore, not an insider to feminism’s rhetoric. Having had the rhetoric drilled into me, I do not need to be told what feminism says about itself.

However, remembering I’m male, I also have the view from outside the fence. What feminists and their organizations DO turns out to run in a wholly different direction than what the self-descriptive language says. What feminism says it is, and what it demonstrates that it is, are entirely contradictory.

What consistent elements have I seen in feminism’s organized actions, running against the self descriptive claims made in feminist rhetoric?
Censorship, intimidation, personal smear campaigns, purposeful false accusation, threats of violence, threats of death, actual violence, organized in-person stalking, vandalism, extortion, systematic academic fraud, calumny, and a consistent thread of hatred. That’s what I have seen in overwhelming proportion vastly overshadowing the rhetoric which claims “feminism is about equality”.

I began my list with censorship, and I could have stopped there. What is it about “equal rights for women” or any other self-descriptive feminist talking point that leads to an urge to silence and suppress any disagreeing opinion? The censorship is real, pervasive, and when resisted, violent. Picture a mob of 20, armed with box-cutters to stop one man with a human rights poster. Or better yet, imagine an esteemed scholar giving a talk at a university about something as socially relevant as suicide rates and educational problems, yet having attendees harassed and intimidated, trying to enter that talk through doors blocked by thugs, all because individuals identifying as feminist did not like the speaker.

In answer to my own question, there is no relationship between censorship and “women’s rights”. Censorship, whether practiced by feminists, or by the state police of a brutal and dictatorial regime is driven by totalitarian impulse, as well as fear and hatred.

It is not just the right of the person who speaks to be heard, it is the right of everyone in the audience to listen and to hear; and every time you silence somebody, you make yourself a prisoner of your own action. You deny yourself the right to hear something. In other words your own right to hear and be exposed is as much involved in all these cases as the right of the other to voice his or her view. ~Christopher Hitchens.

But setting aside the organized actions of feminism, as well as the self-description, there is also at the heart of that ideology, a short list of claims about the world.

The first is patriarchy. According to feminist theory, patriarchy is a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships based on male supremacy and oppression of women. This “theory” does not explain how almost all war dead through history have been men, or how workplace safety throughout the world emphasizes female safety to the near exclusion of protection for men. 93% of workplace fatalities are male, and it is historically not until women colonize a trade or a profession that safety becomes a major concern. Women also spend 80% of disposable income world-wide, comprise the majority of the voting public in democratic nations, and continue to enjoy female favouring affirmative acton in education, despite a growing 65% dominance in educational outcomes in higher ed. So setting aside the blatant, overt, glaring falsehood of such theory, it also assumes or implies that the vast majority of men are sociopaths, by virtue of being male.

That I am not a sociopath does not make me “one of the good ones”. My non-sociopathy is normal, and the “theory” implying all or most men are basically evil is itself, vile bigotry which has, over 40 years, exhausted my forbearance.

Another claim about the world is rape culture. This is the dogmatic insistence that our culture endorses, or promotes, or enables the violent crime of rape, committed against women, by men.

Rape culture is certainly real. But it is not a phenomenon of male-on-female rape enablement, it is real in the sense of being a political and social narrative kept alive by it’s proponents. Rape culture is an item of popularized social belief. The phrase, by the way is a retooling of the second wave feminist rhetoric “all men are rapists”. That item of popular agitprop being no longer acceptable to utter in public, big box feminism has re-phrased several times in the past few decades, keeping the message alive with a better politicized delivery. “Men can stop rape,” and “Rape culture” are two such examples. “Teach men to not rape” is a slogan appearing on hundreds of posters carried in the public parades, called Slut Walks, emerging around the world since 2011.

“Teach men to not rape,” implying that men, without instruction are rapists by default. Nothing from any history of hatred or bigotry is the equal of this message in sheer malice. Secondary to that most overt message of hatred is the implication that rape and sexual assault are exclusively or even mostly male perpetrated. Without a distracting meander into cited example, it’s not. The still popular advent of Slut Walks in cities around the world are unambiguously hate rallies. If you’ve participated in these hate rallies, shame is the appropriate emotion for you to feel on reflection.

And that’s why your recent expression of support for that ideology requires my departure. I cannot pretend feminism is anything less offensive, destructive or malevolent than an organized, purposeful and depraved cult of violence and hatred. And you claim to support it. That it is publicly accepted, supported by politicians, and mainstream makes no difference at all. You are an adult, you have no excuse.

Now what I’ve described is overt hatred. But as a self-professed feminist, you may claim to support no violence, advocate no hatred, and you might believe yourself to be a kind, loving human with none of the malice I have just described.

Aside from the aspect of patriarchy theory implicit claiming all men are sociopaths is the victimhood of all women. The attachment of innate victimhood to female identity excepts women from accountability for any violence, overt or otherwise. The killing of children is excused. The killing of men is excused. The brutalization of men is comedy. The sexual mutilation of a man by his wife is the punchline of a joke on daytime TV. You are a self described feminist, and as such, I know you will not recognize my humanity if I am anything except a convenient utility to you. When I cease to be of use, I will become invisible as a human, and my pain, or my damage, irrelevant, or perhaps funny.

In receipt of this notice, you may decide that rather than the truth, carefully and clearly expressed herewith, my reason and motivation is other than what has just been expressed. I hate women, you might decide. If that, or some variation should be your conclusion, shame on you. Shame on you for cowardice, dishonesty and solipsism. Shame on you. And goodbye.

  • http://fightingfeminism.wordpress.com Mike Buchanan

    Wow. JTO, thank you. A remarkable piece, even by your high standards, and your timing couldn’t have been better.

    The renowned British sociologist Dr Catherine Hakim is going to debate the state of feminism in the modern era with the feminist writer and activist Natasha Walter on BBC Radio 4 next Monday. I wrote a short piece on the matter on one of my blogs (link below) with a link to Dr Hakim’s ‘Preference Theory’ (2000). Her theory elegantly explains the preponderance of men in senior positions (in the private sector, at least…):

    http://j4mb.wordpress.com/2013/02/26/bbc-radio-discussion-on-feminism-with-dr-catherine-hakim/

    I’d been planning to send Dr Hakim one or two articles on why feminism is a malicious scourge on society, when your new piece on AVfM appeared on my PC. Thank you so much. I shall email it – and nothing else – to her now.

    Mike Buchanan

    JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
    (and the women who love them)

    http://j4mb.wordpress.com

  • AntZ

    “My mother was part of the second wave, and I was fed the talking points from infancy and onward.”

    Same here. I often felt like a fly on a wall. I was unseen by a room of women who gorged on each other’s hatred, like a school of sharks driven into a crazed feeding frenzy by the scent of blood and death. They ignored my because I was eight, and they must have thought that I would never remember what they were saying.

    In fact, I remember everything. Seeing one’s mother howl hatred into a room filled with the scent of cigarette smoke and liquor is not something easy to forget. Feminism has nothing to do with equality. It was born from hatred, and hatred is all that it is.

    • Bewildered

      Unbelievable and frightening!

    • Kimski

      Same here, AntZ. Only I was ten, but the memories are similar.

  • Bombay

    Very good article!

    “….. I hate women, you might decide. If that, or some variation should be your conclusion, shame on you. Shame on you for cowardice, dishonesty and solipsism. Shame on you. And goodbye.”

    No, you have a small penis…..

    • Bewildered

      LMFAO! That won’t do, it has lost its sting due to over usage.

  • http://www.hermitparkclinic.com.au Greg Canning

    JTO at his brilliant best,

    a letter all feminists should read and reflect on,

    and a stance all men should take with those known to them who profess and spread the hatred of feminism…

    thank you.

  • Zerbu

    Another great article that could be useful for introducing new people to the movement. I agree with this, and I honestly can’t call anyone who believes in real equality a feminist.

    OT: AVfM is now close to being within the 50,000 most visited sites on the Internet, and is reaching critical popularity. Just a few days ago, on a forum that is as unrelated to gender issues, politics or debates as could possibly be, there was an offtopic discussion where gender issues started to come up. The feminist starting the discussion mentioned the world is ruled by men, and added “say whatever you want, but it’s the TRUTH” – that’s a step, because in the past that last part would be unnecessary as everyone would believe men ruled the world).

    I mentioned men’s rights in as calm a tone as possible, then after a short argument with the feminist who started the discussion, another feminist lashed out screaming and shouting beyond belief, even going as far as saying the standard method for dealing with rape cases is to murder the rape victim. I have a theory on why that happened. I think she knew about the movement and was shocked to see an MHRA outside where she would expect them, because not even an extremely radical feminist would get that defensive if she thought it was just one person making the arguments.

    What happened just goes to show how much the movement is spreading. In fact, with the amount of people who have indicated awareness of the MHRM’s existence, it’s almost safe to say we’ve became critical to mainstream feminism.

    (The offtopic part looked hard on the eyes, so I split it into multiple paragraphs)

    • Keith

      I’m noticing a tension rising in my corner of the world also. I tend to engage in mischievous activism. When I pass a woman on the sidewalk I refuse to walk on the outside. I’ve noticed for some women it’s chilling.

      I also ride the bus and play you tube videos, but I put my earphones in my ears without pushing the jack all the way into my tablet. The result is everyone around me hears the video and I just sit there acting like I don’t know. Twice I’ve had men inform me that they can hear the video and both times the response was the same, GOOD. I play mostly topical anti feminist videos 5 minutes or less. I like to get the whole message out before people get off at their stop.

      • August Løvenskiolds

        Try playing one of Karen Straughan’s (GirlWritesWhat) longer videos so that the listeners only get a part of it. They’ll want more. Some will want a lot more. A completed thought can be filed away – an incomplete one demands further attention.

        • Keith

          Actually I did and this guy came up and wanted to shoot the shit so we chatted on the bus for about 40 min. Which led to a lot of foul looks from women on the bus around us. I loved every second of it.

          • August Løvenskiolds

            That’s greatness, sir. I’ve gotten some of those dagger looks, too. Balm to the soul – a man they cannot control just drives them nuts.

  • justman

    John Hembling, you are a brave man. Well done.

  • donzaloog

    Very good article. It should be shared as much as possible.

  • http://manamongoaks.com/index.html Ray

    Bravo! Well said, good sir.

  • Kimski

    I wish I had this letter/article when I quit my job and left my career chase behind me to do something on my own. It would have fit perfectly as a reaction to my general working environment back then, and I’m far better off now.

    Excellent, sir.

  • http://manamongoaks.com/index.html Ray

    “What feminists and their organizations DO turns out to run in a wholly different direction than what the self-descriptive language says. What feminism says it is, and what it demonstrates that it is, are entirely contradictory.”

    Mental illness is feminism’s dirty little secret. Okay, it’s a big secret, but anyone who truly takes a good look can see it.

    Dr. T., Paul, et. al., if we were to publish our own DSM of mental disorders, what would we call gender feminism, and what would be a good, one sentence, descriptor of the disorder? How about, Raging Assualtive Gyno-centrism for the disorder’s name, or “RAG” for short, or “MFD” for Misandrist Feminist Diatribism? Personally, I like “RAG,” although “MFD” might be more accurate. Gosh, isn’t it fun inventing language out of thin air. Imagine the first diagnosis to be leveled against a hard core gender feminist with “RAG,” “Personally Charlotte, I think you’re ‘RAGGING’ on me.” (no pun intended)

    Note: “Nuttier than squirrel poop” is a term already used loosely by hill folk back east so that’s not very original for a short, one sentence, description of “RAG.” I like “Gender Feminism – when you’re insane enough to be the very craziest.” :-)

    Note: Out of respect for the many, many decent human’s who have menstrual cycles and still care about men and their needs and issues, Raging Assaultive Gyno-centrism “RAG” in no way means menstruation, nor is it intended as demeaning to you in any way. Yet, “RAG” most certainly applies to males who subscribe to gender feminism.

  • http://manamongoaks.com/index.html Ray

    “This ‘theory’ does not explain how almost all war dead through history have been men, or how workplace safety throughout the world emphasizes female safety to the near exclusion of protection for men. 93% of workplace fatalities are male, and it is historically not until women colonize a trade or a profession that safety becomes a major concern.”

    I’ve heard the term “occupational hazard” used by a “company man” safety officer to rationalize the dangers of exposure to asbestos. That’s what a man has historically gotten, when he raises a safety issue.
    http://tinyurl.com/427rft2

    As far as war casualties, I spent 21 months on two amphibious assault ships off the coast of Vietnam in the late 1960’s (three tours of duty). We often had Marines on board. The one saying I heard most often repeated by these “role conditioned” Marines was “Get tough or die.” They did plenty of both.
    http://tinyurl.com/yknvnqv

    Yes, women have recently been granted access to ground combat roles.

    An old Virginia Slims cigarette slogan from the 1960’s or 1970’s targeted women with the words, “You’ve come a long way baby.” Well, when it comes to roles in combat, some brave women have stepped up and paid the ultimate price and I respect them, but in general, “You’ve got a long way to go ‘babies’ before you’ve sacrificed your butts anywhere near the extent that men have.” And that goes double for all the Women’s Studies professors in our colleges and universities.

    • John A

      Ray,
      Good points, war was a hell of a lot safer in the 1960’s than it was in 1944 and 1917. These days it’s safer again, more convenient too. I’m not playing down the risks and hardships that soldiers are going through or went through in Afghanistan, Iraq and vietnam. WWI and WWII were unimaginably horrific, not to mention any number of other historic wars.

      It’s one thing to sign up for today’s military, quite another to sign up for the wars past.

  • Grumpy Old Man

    Good Jon…

  • Stephen O’Brian

    Great article JtO.

    Who is John Gault?

  • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suzanne McCarley

    Great article, John! And thanks, I needed a new Quote of the Week!
    “What feminism says it is, and what it demonstrates that it is, are entirely contradictory.”

  • napocapo69

    Stunning piece John.

  • Howard Gordan

    It will be about 2 years this summer that I came on board the MHRM and this site. This is the best written article I have seen and it sums up every reason this site and the MHRM are an absolute necessity. Thank you John. This should be on the front page of every newspaper tomorrow, however we all know that this letter is also directed to almost all of them too.

  • John A

    Great article John, one point I takeaway is that feminists still cling on to the idea that MRAs are a bunch of disaffected conservative traditionalists or no-hoper misfits. The reality they face is that MHRAs are typically men and women who have grown up in a feminist environment and who have tried to reconcile the ideal of equality with the feminist reality of female privilege justified by the demonization and hatred of men.

  • Justice

    JTO and the other men who post who are idiots. You can write elegant prose all day but nothing will change. Feminism has always been about getting more power and it will continue to grow like a cancer until eradicated.

    Until JTO and other men here actually START DOING SOMETHING in the political action realm, the feminists have no reason to accept anything you write.

    Helllloooo … wake up and smell the coffee.

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      Justice and the other men who post comments here are idiots. You can nit pick from the peanut gallery all day but nothing will change. Feminism has always been about getting more power and it will continue to grow like a cancer until eradicated.

      Until Justice and other men here actually START DOING SOMETHING other than telling other men what to do, MHRAs have no reason to accept anything you write.

      Helllloooo … wake up and smell the coffee.

    • Peter Wright (Tawil)

      Writing online IS political action. It reaches literally millions of minds and often alters thier thinking. Only an idiot would miss that.

    • http://www.johntheother.com John Hembling (JtO)

      What do you suggest I do, that I am not already doing? Should I follow your example? What are you doing that we are not, and what is the effect?

      • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

        Exactly the right question, John. Yours is the inquiry that should always be directed at those who use the “you’re doing it wrong” argument: if this is wrong, show me what is right.

        We do always run into the danger of falling into the false syllogism of 1) Something must be done, 2) this is something, 3) therefore do that. Nevertheless those who actually are doing something have every right to look askance at those who do nothing besides say “you’re doing it wrong.”

        If you’re so sure we’re doing it wrong, tell us what’s right and we’ll discuss it and see if your idea is better. Or better yet, do it and show us the way. If you can not demonstrate what the better way is, or at minimum formulate a rational explanation of what would be better so it may be held up for analysis and contemplation, then, you offer nothing of substance and can go outside and play hide-and-go-fuck-yourself.

        • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

          For our sake, the crickets started playing their castanets.
          – John Hiatt

        • http://marktrueblood.posterous.com/ Mark Trueblood

          Well, a lot of the frequent critics I’ve seen call for:

          1. The triumphant return of traditionalism, which in reality is less likely to happen than the Care Bears bouncing out of a rainbow to heal the world. Not to mention that traditionalism is partly to blame.

          2. Violent revolution, which I consider to be reprehensible, foolish, and possibly agent provocateur tactics.

    • http://www.youtube.com/user/DannyboyCdnMRA Dan Perrins

      See now you just pissed me off Justice.
      I don’t hear or see you doing a damn thing except complaining about one aspect of activism.
      Now before you open your mouth to reply make sure you look at JTO’s and the Vancouver groups postering campaigns.
      Then for just a few moments I want you to click google and read some thesis by any of the noted feminists. Dig through it verify what is claimed in it and expose the fallacies.
      Not exactly quick easy work.
      Tell you what Justice if your in the Hamilton area or Toronto area why not come on out to the U of T event this thurs Mar. 7 and do some boots on the ground activism work with me.
      Or if you would like come on by and help me do a sticker run out in front of the family or criminal court houses.
      Or why don’t you submit and article yourself.
      Or if you still want to put your feet up and criticize well I got some words for you.
      STFU.

  • Stephen O’Brian

    Dear Colleagues,

    He just quit too – https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=i2xV4-CDoNQ#!

    Skip to 18:20secs to see a beautiful sight!

  • Stephen O’Brian

    A simple response to “walk-a-mile in her shoes” should be “First, show me your draft card”

    • Nightwing1029

      I actually have a better one than that, Stephen.
      Ask this:
      “You ask me to walk a mile in your shoes. When was the last time you laced up my combat boots, and did the same?”

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/DannyboyCdnMRA Dan Perrins

    Effing loved this article JTO.
    Pure Gold sir !

  • HieronymusBraintree

    Great Post.