gay bashing

Feminist Gay-Bashing

Note: This article is also available in Spanish.

Have you noticed how much hatred feminists direct at MGTOW guys? Is it just because they can’t be bothered to distinguish between PUAs, MRAs and MGTOW or is there more to it? I think there is. I think if we look at feminism’s record on gay men, the Ultimate MGTOW, we can see what’s really going on.

A while ago I found out about the Redstockings, a radical feminist group founded in the late sixties. They had a nasty streak of man-hating gay-bashing and it wasn’t incidental, it flowed from their basic premises. So maybe all their good was really no good at all. And they were not some fringe group and they were not the only feminists of their period to use gay-bashing rhetoric and weave man-hating and gay-bashing principles into their work. It turns out all kinds of very prominent feminists in the late ’60s and early ’70s went in for this kind of bigotry.

John Lauritsen gave a talk back in 1976 that lays this all out in great detail. He cites a widespread pattern of vilification of gay men and gay organizations by feminists of that time. Feminists conducted a campaign of disrupting gay events and undermining gay organizations. As they say, read the whole thing. It is a very ugly history. If you have never heard about it in your courses in Women’s Studies, go back and ask why. Bring back the answers; I bet they will be hilarious.

Here he quotes Carol Hanisch where she explicitly enunciates the homophobic claim that male homosexuality and male separatism are misogynist. Oh that’s it! It’s all about the wimminz!

 “Men’s liberationists always bring up ‘confronting their own feelings about men’ by which they mean homosexuality. Male homosexuality is an extension of the reactionary club (meaning both group and weapon). The growth of gay liberation carries contempt for women to the ultimate: total segregation. The desire of men to ‘explore their homosexuality’ really means encouraging the possibility of homosexuality as a reaction against feminist demands. This is the reason the movement for “gay rights” received much more support only after women’s liberation became a mass movement.”

There it is: men ignoring women is contempt. Even when we do nothing we are guilty of harming women, because we owe them attention and it is violence when we “deprive” them of it. Talk about a rape culture – they are entitled to our sexual attention.

So men have a duty to have sex with women and not with men. That is rape culture and it is feminists demanding it. Oh, and forced heterosexuality for men. Can you see the difference between these people and Sarah Palin or Rick Santorum? Me neither.

Or maybe there’s no intention of there being any sex – men are just supposed to marry and support women – because they “deserve” it like all the advertising is constantly telling us. Female privilege much?

Lauritsen gives Kate Millett–author of “Sexual Politics” and, ironically, a lesbian separatist–special attention for her hatred of male relationships. She comes across as both stupid and dishonest. For instance she equates homosexuality and Nazism, which is an especially obscene piece of stupidity in view of the actual history, and a transparent piece of dishonesty in view of how well-known that history is.

He also details these feminists’ hatred of drag queens, too. That hatred came as no surprise either.

This bigotry is not some little splinter thing in feminism. It is foundational. Millett’s Sexual Politics was seminal to the movement and Hanish was a founding member of the radical wing of the movement. She edited the Redstockings Collective’s book the Feminist Revolution and coined the phrase “the personal is political”. These were not marginal people or marginal views. It’s no good whining how feminism is not a monolith when every pebble of it shares this theoretical underpinning.

Speaking of the Redstockings, we are going to look at their manifesto in the next post on this subject. Even if you have never read it or even heard of it, none of it will be unfamiliar. You see it in every feminist space on the net and you hear it in every gender studies class.

Lauritsen says it best:

 “We must recognize our enemies wherever we find them. Nobody’s ideas and nobody’s actions should be exempted from criticism.”

Gay men in solidarity with feminists against hetero men? That may be attractive to someone coming out of high school and all that trauma, but alliances with people who despise you are just sick.

About Jim Doyle

Army veteran - 28 years, active, NG and Reserve; gay man, grandfather, avid gardener. I love languages. I speak five and am more or less familiar with several more.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Theseus

    Ha! Thank you for pointing this out Jim; I’m sure Andy Bob has done so before, but your history lesson is great and we need to revisit this issue as much as possible.

    I always laugh at this stuff. The modern pc narrative is that the LGBT community and feminists are one big ideological family that essentially want the same thing. BULLSHIT!!!

    The dirty little secret is that a lot of gay guys can’t stand lesbian feminists, and it’s probably the biggest elephant in the room that feminist supporting progressives are oblivious to, or in denial about.

    And to all of our right leaning brothers and sisters out there: Supporting the rights of our Gay brothers to be able to make the same choices on marriage as anyone else (whether you think marriage sucks or not), is NOT the same thing as supporting lesbian feminists.

    • JinnBottle

      Theseus – (See my Reply to another Comment of yours below.)

      “The dirty little secret is that a lot of gay guys can’t stand lesbian feminists, and it’s probably the biggest elephant in the room that feminist supporting progressives are oblivious to, or in denial about.” Thanx for lighting that corner of the room, and I’d like to hear more on this from you, or whomever.

      “The modern pc narrative is that the LGBT community and feminists are one big ideological family that essentially want the same thing. BULLSHIT!!!”

      But how, in the Big Picture, do you make this known? Before I came to this site, I was under the impression that All Gay Men Were Like That, as far as being sort of hobby-feminists and ball busters. Personal experience, both at the start of the “movement” (just after Stonewall) with my first wife’s friends, and my 5-1/2 year experience in the SF Bay Area in the late 80s/early 90s was part of it; but the Mainstream Media certainly kept the prejudice fixed in my own mind.

      Anyway, thanx again all who contribute to new knowledge here.

  • AutopsyOval Greg

    What are the feminists really going to do about men going their own way? Sure, a male might have stereotyped a woman as someone that can’t be trusted, but it is still a right. There can also be the reason that he doesn’t want to support anyone, and marriage kind of demands support.

    The gay bashing from the Redstockings as you would call them, is also very stupid. Has it ever occurred to them that a man can be more attracted to another man than a woman without thinking of women as anything less than a man? Of course, in relative terms, that man may think of men as greater in the terms of how he can value them more for selection. If these feminists think that gay men are misogynistic, then lesbians are misandric for the same reasons. But to them misandry doesn’t exist for some reason. You can point out to them that there are related incidents of what they call misogynistic to what a man might call misandric, and the double standard just doesn’t hit home with them. Any person that wants the double standards to stop and is objective enough will point out this shit.

  • Carlos

    The Redstockings certainly seemed to be radical misandrists but I have to admit a certain grudging respect for them based on my, admittedly limited, memory of the things I’ve read about them.

    Unlike like their more modern counterparts, the Redstockings, while radical, bigoted and misguided, did not engage in all the intellectual dishonesty and academic fraud that we now come to expect as part and parcel with the feminist project. They were radical and hateful certainly, but they openly admitted it without pretending to be part of an “equality” movement.

    Furthermore, the Redstockings were instrumental in exposing their “sister” Gloria Steinem as a long-time CIA asset involved in social engineering. An extremely politically incorrect fact that the mainstream media continues to avoid like the plague and one which most people are still unaware of decades later.

    • bluesydave

      So there is something to that Gloria Steinem being involved with the CIA idea then? I was reading about that a couple of days ago, but wasn’t sure if it was some kind of conspiricy theory. Seems as though it could be legit?

  • GQuan

    This, I’m afraid, is why the political left will come apart and die (and I say this as someone whose political views are very left-wing). Feminism is the darling of the left, its most powerful interest group, but feminism is disastrous and hostile to homosexuals (at least male homosexuals, but often homosexuals in general), black people and other ethnic minority groups (both by taking attention and funding from genuine problems in those communities and through direct destruction of their families), and working-class (lower-ststus) men of all races. By embracing feminism, the left has in the long-term betrayed and alienated all other interest groups it claimed to represent. Many of them haven’t worked it out yet – too busy blaming the Straight White Male who supposedly holds the world in his iron grip – but eventually they will, and then finally everyone will see what should have been obvious – the real enemy is feminism.

    • Dean Esmay

      Either that or a growing number of leftists start to figure out that most forms of feminist governance and policy are anything but progressive or human rights oriented, regardless of the rhetoric.

      Not to devolve into more left/right bullshit, I’m just saying, there are growing voices from multiple parts of politics calling bullshit on misandry and pseudoscientific rubbish coming from the gender ideologues.

  • Political Cynic

    Very nice. Glad to see more of this history out there. Far too many people (including gay men) have bought into the myth that “feminism supports gay rights”. It doesn’t. What we are seeing now, with the use of “gay-shaming” against MGTOWs and with the growing cries of the feminist victims of “Gay male misogyny” are simply continuations of what was already there. .

    Where are the feminists on gay rights in Africa? Most of the most restrictive laws, including the ones requiring execution, are enforced against gay men, yet feminists are silent, and were silent in 2010 when the UN removed homosexuality from its resolution condemning arbitrary executions. Where are the feminists opposing the statements of the female 2011 Nobel Peace Prize winner, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, who openly supports laws criminalizing homosexuality? They are not only silent on the issue, but in fact idolize her, as shown in her continuing presence as a writer at HuffPo.

    Gay men and straight men are all MEN-and MEN have NO place in feminism

    • Theseus

      Agreed and well stated. However as I said above, I don’t think that as many gay men have bought into this stuff as you may think. I think some of them are silent in the political and social arena on this because they don’t want to be seen as supporting trad/cons and right wing fundies. In private, it’s a completely different matter.

      • JinnBottle

        Could you elaborate, Theseus; this is a facet of Mens Rights, etc, that I’ve been interested in for a long time – to wit, some idea what percentage of gay men actually do support *all* men’s rights?
        (If you *can’t* elaborate, I can see why: The Mainstream Media’s lens is so distorted on this, as in all sex-gender issues, that it’s doubtful anyone can get close to a true picture.)

    • theoutside

      Well said.

    • FBee

      I suppose I disagree with you for two reasons.

      First, there have been plenty of movements which have been anti-queer. Consider the Father’s Rights movements (father of the MRM), which was predicated on the belief that fathers were necessary for the well-being of children. That of course alienates many queer identified folks, and thus by your logic makes the MRM hostile to queer folks.

      Second, as a gay man myself, I actually see a lot of places where feminist theory, feminism as a movement, and queer theory and activism have many points of intersection. It is obvious that they can (and do) come together to produce powerful social force and scholarship.

      • Theseus

        C’mon you don’t have to be anti-gay to be pro-father. That’s just plain silly. You would be hard pressed to find a kid that didn’t want to know both his/her birth parents; however the rational person also understands that it is is not always an option or the best environment for the child to live with one or both of their natural mother or father.

        Being pro-father is no different than being pro-mother.

        Brother, I don’t see how feminism is your friend in any way shape or form. You are a man and a lover of men; in feminists eyes you are the very source of their oppression and all their problems; they don’t give a flying fuck about your well being.

        • FBee

          “I don’t see how feminism is your friend in any way shape or form. You are a man and a lover of men; in feminists eyes you are the very source of their oppression and all their problems; they don’t give a flying fuck about your well being.”

          Except that not at all how the vast majority of feminists actually believe. There have been some historical male-hostility within feminism, but I don’t think that a universal or contemporary characteristic of feminism. In fact, my university Women’s Center is also the location of the LGBT Center on campus.

          Once again, consider how contemporary queer theory meshes with contemporary feminist theory. Judith Butler, who arguably is one of the most influential contemporary feminists is as arguably the “mother” of modern queer theory. It’s hard to escape this connection because both are extremely interrelated.

          • Dr. F (Ian Williams)

            Thank you Fbee for bee(ing) the voice of (t)reason for half of the population. Of the same species as yourself.

            Pointing out that there are feminists who are friends of us who have knives in our backs? What have you sniffed, some sort of anti-brain gas?

            Judith Butler and her connection to gays, and the Women’s Center on being the location of the LGBT Center on your campus?

            You think blokes in ail reading this or the father looking at the photos of his kids he hasn’t seen for ten years is going to go, “Hmm. Yeah, this Fbee has turned my world around. ?

            Pick your soggy bum off the hot-plate and chuck yourself in the compost bin. Do that and the place will smell better you boorish and insensitive prick.

          • Theseus

            What? You mean the “vast majority of feminists” that have signed on to patriarchy theory? How about “male privilege”? Hmmm? Oh, how about “rape culture”? How about cooked stats when it comes to rape and violence? How about lies and distortions that paint DV as gender directional?

            That’s just the tip of the ice burg. Do you mean to tell me that your “vast majority of feminists” don’t sign onto most or all of those beliefs? These are all idiotic ideas that demonize and “other” men and boys. If you can, please direct me to any major feminist publications and websites that blast all these so-called ideas to shit.

          • Never Blue Again

            Except that not at all how the vast majority of feminists actually believe. There have been some historical male-hostility within feminism, but I don’t think that a universal or contemporary characteristic of feminism.

            Let me make it simple to you ….

            Not all Cyanide are the same. So, Which one you would like to take?

            Point is, like feminist; they all have poisonous characteristics. It’s only matter of deadliness.

      • Andy Bob

        “…I actually see a lot of places where feminist theory, feminism as a movement, and queer theory and activism have many points of intersection.” Mr FBee

        So do I – they’re called lesbian bars, Women’s Centres and Gender Studies lecture theatres. As a uni student, either in, or barely out of, your teens, you have yet to learn that feminists pretend to tolerate you as a useful idiot willing to serve their ends. Your indoctrination has been so complete that you are actually grateful for the opportunity to defend and deny their anti-male bigotry.

        “There have been some historical male-hostility within feminism…”

        “…some…” (!?)

        Have you actually read any feminist theory? It is saturated with anti-male rhetoric that not even a brainwashed youth like yourself could possibly miss. Do you excuse it because it is mainly aimed at straight men? Is that what they teach in queer theory – how to be bigot who can only function in the real world by clinging to a victim identity that will leave you crippled with self-loathing?

        Your feminist-indoctrinated education is doing a number on you, and you don’t even realize it. Your campus’ LGBT Centre is located in the Women’s Centre so the femistasi can monitor, supervise and control the activities of gay men who, experience has taught, have a pesky tendency to ignore female demands.

        Feminists despise you because you are a man – therefore, a privileged member of the patriarchy. Their narrative, set out in every feminist tome ever written, tells them so. This is something you are going to have to learn the hard way. Start by attempting to discuss men’s human rights issues with your Women’s Centre Queer Theory mates, and watch some of that ‘historical male-hostility’ in action.

        Good luck with that.

        • FBee

          “As a uni student, either in, or barely out of, your teens…”

          I’ll let you in on a little secret, so long as you promise not to dox me: I’m a graduate and I’m 26. I’ve self-identified as a feminist for a long while now, and I once counted myself as part of as one of those “post-patriarchal” men. lol.

          “Have you actually read any feminist theory? It is saturated with anti-male rhetoric…”

          Yes I have. But if you only read the works of Mary Daly and Janice Raymond, you’ll get the false belief into your head that all feminists are hostile to LGBT folk. I know MRAs hate people who are knowledgeable about feminism, but I have a hard time believing that someone familiar with feminist theory could think that folks like Judith Butler, R.W. Connell, Christine Delphy, Sandra Bartky, and Kimberlé Crenshaw are anti-male or hostile to gay men.

          “Your campus’ LGBT Centre is located in the Women’s Centre so the femistasi can monitor…”

          Or our center director is a queer identified person.

          “Feminists despise you because you are a man – therefore, a privileged member of the patriarchy.”

          I don’t think you know what it means to be a man or what patriarchy is… No one I know personally hates me because I’m a man and because of patriarchy. You are just factually wrong about the “feminist narrative.”

          • STONE

            Patriarchy Smashing is really not for the tender-hearted.
            So you have been steeped in Hegelian Dialectic, Marxism, Post Modern philosophy, and Critical Theory. All important influences on feminist thought, and none of them have anything to do with hating men. But, feminist thought warps the mind and justifies injustice. Feminist activism is motivated by this warped thinking. Gender is not really what these gender theorists think it is, and feminism is directly implicated in the current moral panics, scapegoating, and demonization of males.

          • Andy Bob

            I have read your blog and now comprehend that every thought, idea and response, – both personal and intellectual – that you have is from a so-called queer theory perspective. Like feminists, proponents of queer theory operate on a series of assumptions about the world which are both erroneous and egocentric.

            Your central gripe about the MHRM is that it will not bend to make you the centre of its universe. Here is a quote from you:

            “Because of this, they think the MRM should only focus on “men’s issues” which necessarily aren’t queer issues.”

            In other words, when the MHRM addresses issues that don’t focus specifically on your particular “axis of oppression”, then you feel ignored, marginalized and, well, oppressed. Like all queer theorists, you resent any conversation that doesn’t revolve around you, or coddle you by gazing in awe at your dazzling aura of otherness’.

            “The issues they [MHRAs] focus on are about men who engage in certain relationships with women, typically centering around the institution of heterosexuality.”

            Heterosexuality is not some institution enforced by an evil Ministry of Normal upon hapless plebs who would otherwise embrace being ‘queer’. Allow me to let you in on a little secret: heterosexuality is the natural state of most men and women. There is nothing ‘wrong’ with it. To think otherwise, which all queer theorists seem to do, is fundamentally, and spectacularly, stupid.

            You even give a list of what you call ‘quasi-straight men’s issues’. (I can only assume that this term reflects your queer theory belief that straight people aren’t really straight – they only think they’re straight. That Ministry of Normal is insidious.)

            The issues you list are: an end to forced military conscription; an end to false rape accusations; an end to the atrocities committed by corrupt Family and Divorce Courts; encourage men to stop seeking the approval of women; encourage women to use their own financial means to support themselves; demand an immediate end to domestic violence against men; and , an end to chivalry justice.

            According to you, these issues are somehow rendered invalid because some – only some – of them affect gay men less than they affect straight men. Human rights issues should not be summarily dismissed simply because they don’t impact upon you personally.

            This outrageously bigoted and myopic attitude is anathema to anyone with a genuine concern for the dignity and human rights of others. It prevents you, and your feminist allies, from accepting that men’s rights are human rights. It is what reveals queer theory as the bastard child of feminism.

            You may think that queer theory has provided you with all the answers – for the same reasons many impressionable young women embrace feminism. However, your blog reveals that it has straightjacketed you with a victim identity and retarded your ability to evolve into fully realized adult, complete with agency and the capacity for empathizing with the issues confronting men whom you dismiss as ‘hetero-normative’.

            Congratulations queer theory – you have created another self-loathing bigot actively working against his own interests. Rest assured, the MHRM, and AVfM, will survive, and thrive, without you.

          • Dr. F (Ian Williams)

            You said;

            I don’t think you know what it means to be a man or what patriarchy is…

            You got the first three words right.

      • Paul Elam

        The idea that fathers are necessary alienates gay men?

        What, are you fucking stupid?

        • FBee

          “First, there have been plenty of movements which have been anti-queer. Consider the Father’s Rights movements (father of the MRM), which was predicated on the belief that fathers were necessary for the well-being of children. That of course alienates many queer identified folks, and thus by your logic makes the MRM hostile to queer folks.”

          Gay men are a part of queer folk.

          What are you fucking stupid?

          • Paul Elam

            Not near stupid enough to infer in any belief that fathers are important any gay alienating sentiment. It is a non sequitur. Use your Google if you don’t know what that means, and if you know how to use Google.

            BTW, mothers are important to children. That does not alienate lesbians.

            Or are you trying to peddle the idea that saying that parents are important to children is alienating to gay people?

            You are quickly wearing out your welcome here. This is not a forum for idiots who can’t walk across a parking lot without spotting someone who is trying alienate them.

            If you happen to be a gay man, then perhaps you better go back to your feminist masters who love you as long as join them by hating your own sex. There are plenty of gay men who get it here. And more are showing up all the time. We won’t worry if you don’t show up again.

          • Kimski

            Try disagreeing with your masters on any issue, just for the hell of it, without letting them in on the fact that you’re gay. I can promise you that one of the first ad hominems used against you, will be the accusation of being gay.

            If that doesn’t tell you all you need to know about the level of contempt they secretly hold against you, then you’re living in a delusional version of reality.

            Hell, it is one of the most prevalent shaming tactics in the entire feminist arsenal, in order to dismiss and silence dissent from straight males, and these are the people you chose to support???

            I’m not going to ask if you’re fucking stupid.
            I’ll just let your allegiance with feminists speak for itself.

  • GQuan

    It does amaze me how many male homosexuals think feminism is their friend and ally, when it’s quite obvious that as a rule feminists see gay men as a useful tool at best and flat-out despise them at worst. But then I suppose it’s the age-old political strategy of identifying your most potent adverary and either destroying or co-opting it. Just as any ideological dictator must either co-opt or destoy the family and the church (as these are the alternative power blocs that he competes with for the heart and mind of the citizen), so to did feminism need to neutralize the men most likely to Go Their Own Way and least vulnerable to female shaming, the men who had no need or desire to bargain with women individually or collectively. Since homosexuality was severely repressed and homosexuals faced significant bigotry, and feminism is all about claiming women had the same, co-opting them was the choice option. They were “allies”, united against the Straight Man. In actuality, gay men should understand that feminism is their natural enemy.

  • Droobles

    It was a disturbing quote, but isn’t it a little of a stretch with it being so old?
    The way I see it, the feminist movement uses the (male) gay movement as a way to make people unconfortable.

    Also, hypergamy would mean they would favor more gay men if more and more of them becomes pregnant by artificial means.

    I gess we would only see confrontation between them if they started denying carrying children for them. Bah, I am just rambling by now, but I have been having this idea where men should stop donating sperm (in all the ways this happen).

    As it was discussed many times here, our reproductive rights will only be valuable when sperm stops being a commoditie.

    • Andy Bob

      “It was a disturbing quote, but isn’t it a little of a stretch with it being so old?” Mr Droobles

      Quite the contrary.

      Examining the history of feminism’s’ relationship’ with the gay rights movement reveals that it was always, essentially, parasitic. As John Lauritsen explains, feminists set the gay rights movement back by decades as the issues gay men faced got sidelined in favour of a feminist agenda which viewed gay men as their patriarchal enemy.

      Gay men should have resisted this infiltration, but too many saw political advantage in such an alliance and chose to betray their own interests, and the interests of men everywhere, in order to achieve goals which most of them didn’t really want in the first place. Others were just intimidated by their relentlessly violent tactics. Ask Erin Pizzey about it – better yet, read her autobiography, ‘Which Way to the Revolution’. Never underestimate the inherent violence of feminists.

      LGBT, like the DV industry,is now just a feminist mouthpiece run by the kind of feminist ideologues who are incapable of disguising the vitriolic hatred of men that has always been the foundation of their movement. In doing so, they have alienated a huge percentage of gay men who neither identify as victims, nor are blinded by the fact that their contempt for gay and bisexual men – even transsexuals – is only marginally exceeded by their contempt for our straight brothers.

      John Lauritsen is a key figure in the gay rights movement who saw, at first hand, how feminists gained hegemony over that movement and have continued to exploit it for its own ends. He has been instrumental in giving historical credence to something most gay men already know: feminism is an enemy that actively works against the interests of all men, gay men not excluded.

      I remember Asha James featuring the work of John Lauritsen on her own blog some time ago, along with some very interesting commentary. He is widely-read and very influential. His work will always be relevant and is accurately summarized here by Mr Doyle.

      Needless-to-say, feminists hate his guts.

  • theoutside

    One of the most useful and logical developments would be for the gay rights organizations and networks to join with the MHRM. As this and other articles have shown, it is a natural fit, and their experience in organizing would be very valuable.

    • feminismisbullshit

      The MHRM fights for all men, not just gay men.Misandry greatly affects gays but IMO joining the gay rights movement would lead to the toxic type of rhetoric found in queer studies.Gays should have a voice on the MHRM concerning their issues however that should never be a focus.Besides it risks alienating MRAs who care about boys and men but don’t support gay issues.Gay issues and misandry have been dealt with in a productive manner on AVFM without becominh ideological.

      • theoutside

        I said they should join us, not that we should join them. In joining us they would have to change and disengage from all that rubbish. Naturally some who make their living from that would not want to, but I was not thinking of academic types; I was thinking more of your on the ground activist types. Actually Michel Foucault was an early MHRA. He did not care that much about gay rights per se but was especially concerned with the rights of prisoners — most of whom were men and most of whom were not gay.

  • Grumpy Old Man

    Good Article thx,,,

  • Paul Elam

    The raw, magnificent truth. Only at AVFM. I know. I am biased. So sue me.

  • Phil in Utah

    Nice article. I talked about feminist gay-bashing in an earlier article of mine, but with sadly less research than anecdotes. This really needed to be brought to light.

  • Alex Brown

    In the UK when a serial killer called the beast was killing gay men in the mid 90’s a bunch of lesbians where waving placards with “Stop killing lesbians are gay men.” written on them. The whole LGBT is a joke, just privileged women hijacking the gay men’s movement making it about themselves.

  • Correctrix

    Great article. Also to be noted is the fact that the gays whom feminists hate the most are the masculine ones, because they trigger their misandry even more. See the hatred for the current trend of ‘gaybros’.

    • Stu

      And there is a lot more of those masculine gays then people think. Because they are such ordinary blokes, people don’t notice them. The feminists hate them with good reason, for one, they are masculine, and feminists hate masculinity, the other of course is that women have virtually no control via pussy power over such men.

      • Theseus

        Yup. That’s exactly why most people primarily associate femininity with being gay; they are the ones that stand out.

        Masculine gays are like any other average Joe, with the exception that they are not physically and emotionally attracted to women. You are right; that would drive the fembots bonkers.

      • theoutside


        Examples: Yukio Mishima, Pier Paolo Passolini, Michel Foucault, William Burroughs, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Michelangelo.

        Tesla? …many…

    • Theseus

      Boom! Another great point. These harpies do not like men period, and masculinity is going to take it to a whole other level.

      BTW, I am a portrait and figurative painter; I don’t know who your photog is, but he/she does a great job with the lighting and quality. The black and white was great, and the photo that you are using has an almost north light Renaissance quality to it (watch it’ll turn out it’s just a picture you snapped real quick, and it just turned out that way Lol).

      • Correctrix

        LOL, flatterer. All my pics are selfies taken with my Android phone. I take them whenever I’m in an area with good lighting, to document my transition.

        • robertcrayle

          Your transition is going…beautifully…

          I’m starting to get a bit of a migraine trying to keep tabs on just _how many_ groups and designations and classes that feminists “have a right to hate”. It’s almost genius, like a liar that lies so much people just expect it and even defend it. Almost as if some people who do this so shamelessly and naturally have a right to it.

          • JinnBottle

            “Your transition is going…beautifully…”

            OT: I think so, too. As a matter of fact I’ve been wanting to collect data on this subject – esp currently (“)straight(“) men’s truth-be-told potential attraction to M-to-F TGs. I’ve been meaning to get to a couple of venues we have here in Boston for “alternative art(sits)” that often features one or more TGs for models. I’ve never actually knowingly met a M-to-F TG. But I believe they may – *may – hold potential among alternatives to women for men in the future.

          • Correctrix

            In response to JinnBottle:

            I am not an alternative to women; I am a woman. Straight men (not “straight” men in scare quotes) are attracted to me, as are lesbians. Gay guys and straight women are into maleness and masculinity, which I possess none of.

            It’s true that there are some bi guys who would like to get the ‘best of both worlds’, but they are out of luck because I am only interested in straight guys, and my junk is strictly off-limits pending SRS.

          • JinnBottle

            Reply to Correctrix:

            Noted. I expected something along those lines.

        • Theseus

          Lol What did I tell ya? Sometimes spontaneity produces the best stuff.

  • Lucian Vâlsan

    I have been knowing since before the Internet was invented that the feminazists hate gay men.
    But this is only the second time I read such a thorough analysis with everything gathered in one place and the dots connected.

    Hats off to the author!

  • infowarrior1

    Yes it is indeed true. Men have no problem with other men as long as they are not effeminate harlots.

    • rompastompa

      That was my neg. Why should it matter as long as they’re not harming people or imposing their views on others?

  • Andy Bob

    Great article, Mr Doyle. The writing of John Lauritsen, an iconic figure in the gay rights movement who was instrumental in organizing the first Stonewall riots, is well-known in the gay community.

    His detailing of the devastatingly destructive campaign of terror and intimidation by feminists aginst gay men resonates with so many gay men because the vitriolic homophobia which drives it is so familiar to us – even those not even born during that tumultuous time.

    In fact, the tactics feminists used to infiltrate and bully gay men’s organizations were almost identical to those they employed in the domestic violence industry. Our own Editor-at-Large, Erin Pizzey, witnessed this at first hand and has written vividly frightening accounts of how it was accomplished.

    The parallels are no coincidence. Feminists invaded both movements with the practised ease of natural sociopaths trained in terror tactics that would have made Mao peacock proud. Their invasion made no provision for those who refused to bend to their rigis ideological will. Only very brave and noble souls had the courage to stand up to them – Erin Pizzey has been doing this for decades.

    I don’t know any gay man who isn’t aware that feminists regard them as privileged penis-owners. The only naked homophobia that has ever been aimed at me personally has come from feminists. The moment they sense that you are not on board their victim bus, they will let loose with the most vile gay-bashing bigotry imaginable. Such bigotry is very instructive for gay men who may otherwise be so moronic to believe that feminists are theer allies.

    The main reason why feminists hate gay men so much is because we are men – men who usually like women but, quite frankly, don’t really need them. Envy also plays a role. Gay men know that they have to make their way in the world, so just get on with their lives and careers without expecting handouts from anyone. Of course, this is also true of many lesbians – but these lesbians rarely identify as feminists.

    Feminists have blindly alienated so many people that they are becoming the most vigorously avoided wallfowers at the ball.

  • Andy Bob

    Harlots? So, men having a lot of sex with other consenting adults should be labeled and demonised? Are you sure you haven’t wandered in from Jezebel, that ice bath of sex negativity?

    • infowarrior1

      @Andy Bob

      This is what I mean by harlot:

      I think you are mistaken on what I mean.

    • infowarrior1

      I haven’t made a moral statement. Just stating what I think is a fact. Think of the stereotype of the gay male. Being too concerned by what is superficial and effeminate. Which is perceived by many men as repugnant. I think the article: “Everyone is a harlot” by Jack Donovan(Who is a gay man himself) explains my position.

      • Andy Bob

        I went off Jack Donovan when he started giving blowjobs to white supremacists. His article, ‘Everyone is a harlot’, is an impenetrable mishmash of unrelated assertions combining PUA theory, Animal Planet observations and the awfulness of Kenny Rogers’ facelift. I was not enlightened.

        I think Mr Donovan needs to stop servicing Stormfront and refrain from cramming all of his fleeting obsessions into single articles so incoherent that they resemble something one of his precious bonobos may have flung onto his monitor.

        Jack Donovan has become a cautionary tale warning us that embracing bigotry can turn even the most erudite among us into self-indulgent morons. I suggest you avoid him until he comes to his senses.

      • Robert St. Estephe

        There is the issue of the “dandy” in the 19th century to consider as well. All manner of posing, shallowness, acting, is used to deflect, in decadent societies, to deflect from the question of substance (character, depth, wisdom, personal honor, courage, fortitude). There are plenty of pathetic “macho” poseurs as well who exploit the potentialities of histrionics in the more masculine way. Decadence comes in many shapes, and the deployment of elaborate modes of distraction provide to the narcissist a useful way to deflect awareness from the suffering caused by impulsiveness and thoughtlessness (coming from the addiction to the stimulation of genital nerve endings, as well as other impulses).

  • donzaloog

    Comparing homosexuality to Nazism? That’s a new low for them (as far as I know). I really love the idea of feminism promoting rape culture by stating that they’re entitled to sex. The irony is delicious

  • re-construct

    Wow feminism has certainly morphed since the late 60’s gay bashing days.I have to be honest, I witness no gay bashing at all in modern gender-feminism, in fact if one takes even a brief look at modern “Gender-studies”, Its the hetero-males that are the target of organised federally funded discrimination..

    • Andy Bob

      Not even gender feminists are stupid enough to acknowledge their gay-bashing in their textbooks.

    • Theseus

      Don’t let ’em fool ya. Gay men are their little tokens that they like to parade around with, but it’s just a mask…a thin veneer.

      Read Andy Bob’s comments above on how feminists have bullied their way into the gay rights movement; he spells it out much better than I could.

  • theoutside

    Most heterosexual men are not especially hostile to gay men. At most, they view the effeminate ones as somewhat comical, but that’s about it. Unless their minds are seriously distorted by fundamentalist religion, they don’t care that much. This has been my experience. And all the real contempt for gay men I’ve seen has come from women.

    The gender ideologues in university departments want people to think that “homophobia’ rages in the minds of heterosexual men, but I’ve never seen it. And I further would say that those well-publicized crimes in which a gay man was beaten to death or the like (e.g. Mathew Shepard in the US, there are different exs.) have the earmarks of deliberate false flag operations, i.e. professional hits by agents provocateurs done to create this demonization of most other men in the public mind and then to pass various “hate speech” “hate crime” and similar police state laws.

    There is no natural discord between straight and gay men. The MHRM should try to make use of their experience and skill in organizing to whatever degree possible.

    • Chris Hamer

      I find effeminate men, gay or straight, annoying as all hell. Not to the degree of assaulting them for it, but enough to where we would not hang out on a regular basis. In my limited experience I have only met one such man and our meeting was brief thankfully. The rest of the gay dudes I met were regular dudes no more annoying than any other.

      • ryan mathews

        I find beer-can crushing, football brain-injured, insecure douchebags like YOU annoying as all hell. And this from a GAY “regular dude” who despises feminism, btw.

  • Ginkgo

    Feminism and Third Worldism, both identity movements ultimately, ate and have digested the left. Then the left gets smeared by asscoiation with those two inter-related movements.

  • Ginkgo

    “Consider the Father’s Rights movements (father of the MRM), which was predicated on the belief that fathers were necessary for the well-being of children. That of course alienates many queer identified folks, and thus by your logic makes the MRM hostile to queer folks”

    The Fathers’ Rights movment is objectively pro-gay man. IGay men’s manhood is under constant attack in a homophobic culture and fatherhood confirms a gay man’s manhood. So there’s that.

    Lesbians will probably feel threatened. Well, so what? Lesbians’ motherhood has always been accorded much more respect and protection than gay men’s fatherhood. To the extent lesbiains can be useful in this struggeel, good for them.

    “Second, as a gay man myself, I actually see a lot of places where feminist theory, feminism as a movement, and queer theory and activism have many points of intersection. ”

    Points of intersection are good but insuficient for an enduring. WWII was a point of interesection between the US and the Soviet Union. Thatwas a very temoprorary moment of common interest that eveloved into 45 years of Cold War.

    I would like to see the evidence that the benfits of this intersection have been anything other than one way, the evidence where feminists have actually helped gay men, as opposed to lesbians, rather than gay men serving feminists.

    Because the fact remains that the Redstockings doctrines have become foundational to mainstream feminism, the encode a demand for male utility to women, the demonize male sexuality generally, and they are sexist, objectfying and bigoted. I would like to see feminism interesct its way out of that one.

  • Ginkgo

    “Don’t let ‘em fool ya. Gay men are their little tokens that they like to parade around with, but it’s just a mask…a thin veneer.”

    It’s analogous to the “women and minorities’ scam where feminists hijacked the CRM to their purposes. It’s just the same privileged whtie women making other people into their instruments as a kind of moral fashion accessory.

    • Theseus

      Yes! Yes!

      “You see poor black family that has to struggle? I as a (spoiled middle/upper class white) women share your pain and oppression”. Oh, yeah? How? Crying your way out of a traffic ticket while a black dude gets pulled over for DWB? Yeah please tell me how your sheltered, privileged, and spoiled ass that has men jumping to your aid whenever you pump gas, are carrying too many packages, need a tire changed, and on and on and on…can relate to ANY minority that has experienced past oppression.

    • theoutside

      All good points.

  • Adam McPhee

    Thanks for this. From my studies in social work I know “the personal is political” all too well, I didn’t know it was rooted in radical feminism or from someone with so much hatred.

    Although you mention Kate Millet, a lesbian seperatists, the Redstockings were also opposed to the idea of lesbians as well. What I quickly read just now said they were very heteronormative, and felt women should be with men too. If they felt gay men were expressing their misogyny through their sexual preference, would they then have accepted the term of misandry, as obviously expressed through lesbian sexuality?

  • crydiego

    Long after feminism is gone, after it has done its damage and turned to dust there will still be gay men; one is real, -one is illusion.


    Great article! Looking forward to the piece on The Redstockings Manifesto!

  • Justice

    Feminists have supported gay men for decades, only to gain allies in the increasing hatred of white hetersoexual men.

    Gay men are the useful idiots for feminists who will quickly abandon them when the next inevitable war arrives, as the White Feather Women did.

  • MGTOW-man

    Feminist despise MGTOW because no part of MGTOW subscribes to the irrational feelings of women for group rule-making (hysteria, exaggerations, pity-mongering, use of rare and worst-case scenarios) or to determine any part of their worth as men. They are powerless. They have used meanness against us men with brains in our skulls for as long as there have been people. And the cowardly men out there who help perpetuate this great big manipulative scheme of nature/truth-hating feminists are just as to blame.

    …And they are hung up on thinking that THEY are the real men.

    Huh?!! Go figure. They are the men if being a man is getting women to like them, no matter how stupid they act and no matter how much they sell the boys’ futures down the river.

  • MGTOW-man

    “Gay men in solidarity with feminists against hetero men?”
    —Perhaps gay men would have sided with hetero males if hetero men themselves would not have alienated gay men with all sorts of taunts, myths, beatings, killings, lies, and hatred (perhaps inner, secret self-hatred as well). This hatred happened because our society rewards men and the attainment of manhood for “getting women”. (But we do not do the same to women, ie, must get a man/kids/comply or else not be a “real” woman).

    With the undeniable wit and ability to argue it well…completely removed from female/sexual persuasion, gay men, if they hadn’t been so alienated by hetero-males, could have helped our movement considerably. They rushed to side with feminists because they were so hated by their own sex… and feminism “promised” equality for all….

    So, change men and you change the world. Change what they MUST view as being a real man (wife, kids, compliance) and we win!

  • Seele

    Not only gay men try to side with feminists in the belief that they offer a chance of achieving equality, some MTF TS women also do that, not aware of how they are really seen by the feminists. After all, many MTF TS women try to assert their femininity in manners which make sense to them, be it archetypical “female” appearance, achieving a “traditional woman’s role”, or being a feminist. Many, I reckon, need to take the red pill as well.

  • Ginkgo

    “—Perhaps gay men would have sided with hetero males if hetero men themselves would not have alienated gay men with all sorts of taunts, myths, beatings, killings, lies, and hatred (perhaps inner, secret self-hatred as well). ”

    Yeah, so we gay man did the stupid “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” We were wrong.

    “This hatred happened because our society rewards men and the attainment of manhood for “getting women”.

    This is. Centering women as the metric of manhood is the core of of homophobia.

    “(But we do not do the same to women, ie, must get a man/kids/comply or else not be a “real” woman).”

    We used to.

    • ryan mathews

      >Yeah, so we gay man did the stupid “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” We were wrong.<

      I'm a gay man who is completely anti-feminist, but I'm also smart enough to know that hetero men are NOT and never will be my friends either. We don't share the same goals in this movement at all.

  • MGTOW-man

    “(But we do not do the same to women, ie, must get a man/kids/comply or else not be a “real” woman).”—quoting myself.

    “We used to.”—quoting Ginkgo, above.

    And therein lies a big point I make here on this truly wonderful site.

    We did used to. Philosophically wrong or not, it was fair because both men and women were “tested” this way. When feminsim came to “save” women, they, with the aid of cowardly, duped, (or both) men helping them, obliterated any obligations and sacrifices for women. But feminists, again with the aid of those same men (apparently)
    didn’t change anything for men, boys and manhood attainment.

    Some men still act like they love the losing of clinging to something that is making fools out of themselves.

    But because women accomplished this drastic change against their “inner natures” as far as being female, so too I believe men can do the same thing. When we get men to quit clinging to losing, we will have changed them enough to foment big changes for feminism’s dominance because men will not have to get them a woman in order to be accepted….

    With all my being, I believe that men can be changed. It will not happen overnight, or even in a decade or two, or three. The analogous thing for women didn’t either. But they kept at it, chipping away at how the vast majority of women felt about being a full-fledged woman.

    So when I hear that I must be wrong, or that the task is too large,I do not believe it. Men are no more riveted to their supposed “hard-wiring” than women turned out to be. So when I say, change men and you change the world, it could be a reality, that is, if… IF, we, as a group would get started with something that is going to take a long time.

    Very few radical ideas start out being immediately accepted, and it will be fought vehemently by men, women,and feminsits,(the latter for ulterior reasons).

    But we do need to get started. That is why I ask the right ones who are capable of it to write books, and do many things to help get the ball rolling.

    Look, not all men are going to comply. But if we can get some of them to, by changing their requirements for manhood attainment, then we will be better off. Men and boys will be much better off. …And boys will thank us someday for our willingness to make these sacrifices.

    You know, they are going to need more than just “how to lay (feminist) women”, to REALLY be a man. So why cheat them? If all they know is get-a-woman-no-matter-what, we will not have changed very much either—things will still be much the same as they are now. Who, of us, wants THAT?

    Instead of supposed-to-be-similar-minded MHRA’s opposing me and this idea so much, why not be clever enough to at least factor in this kind of change too?

    Not everyone agrees, but if you do, how are you going to help get this ball rolling? We have a long way to go and if already started, we would be just that much down the road to success…and we wouldn’t have so much of this chaos coming from hate-men feminists.

    Let us put our heads together and figure ways to influence
    men to accept other measures for their manhood attainment, for I also truly believe that men value being seen and thought of a “real” men, as much or more than their love of orgasms. It is not the sex per se, but the recognition that goes with it.

    So I am off on a tangent or something? Well, at least I am trying to talk about things that will get men to stop clinging to feminism(women)—THE very source for feminsim’s success. Agree, or not, shouldn’t we at least communicate?


    • Chris Hamer

      Women did not change their inner nature they merely maximized it’s potential.

  • Observing Libertarian

    I’ve had this opinion for a very long time. I’m a heterosexual straight male (cis-scum-shitlord, I may have business cards made), however – I don’t consider myself particularly attractive. I really don’t, but when women find out I’m a MGTOW and what that entails – they blow a gasket. It confused me early on.

    Why would you be upset? You’re not interested in me as a partner – so why does it matter that I don’t want -you- as a partner?

    It seems to be a catch 22: if you sexualize women, you’re a misogynist – If you don’t sexualize women, you’re a misogynist.

    It seems they demand the attention, luxuries and benefits of everything men do for women – without having to contribute anything back. Therefore any man who’s specifically not interested in worshiping them like a queen – is bad and wrong in some way.

    I think it’s the exact same mental process responsible for the fat shaming microcosm. Women that most men do not find attractive due to their weight: shame men for not finding them attractive simply because they feel they deserve that same attention that skinnier women get.

    It boils down to narcissistic personality disorder.
    “Symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder
    In order for a person to be diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) they must meet five or more of the following symptoms:

    Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
    Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
    Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
    Requires excessive admiration
    Has a very strong sense of entitlement, e.g., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
    Is exploitative of others, e.g., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
    Lacks empathy, e.g., is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
    Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
    Regularly shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes”

    Checkmarks, across the board, checkmarks. The fatshaming crowd and feminists who vehemently demonize gay men and MGTOWs display every single one of those attributes, in spades. They are absolutely obsessive about shaming and demonizing and demoralizing any man who specifically doesn’t want to serve them and their sense of self. Any man not giving them the proper attention – infuriates them.

    They incensed to rage: how dare you not see how special I am, how dare you not recognize how perfect I am, how dare you not worship me and give me what I want. They display every – single – symptom of narcissistic personality disorder in every single detail and regard as discussed in that article from

    I only posted the link to one article describing the condition because i don’t want to turn this comment into it’s own article: but if you simple google the condition you will find the behavior discussed in this article on this page, perfectly described in order resource and text you can find on narcissistic personality disorder. It is so blatant it’s laughable.

  • Cara Ames

    I feel you. As a gay male to straight female transgender person I have experienced what you have. I’ve also had women tell me that I am not a woman, how dare I call myself a woman without having experienced what women have and so on.. I don’t think women recognise men and transgender women as human beings.

    • JPDL

      Women can still be pretty transphobic and homophobic too even if that often gets ignored by many of the sjws, cause it’s easy to just say men are to take all the blame, even many who actually aren’t homophobic or transphobic but just disagree with their narrative