Warning: This article may contain spoilers. I have tried to minimise them as much as possible.
By now some people may be aware of the “controversy”1 surrounding the recent movie Joker2. This is a manufactured controversy because someone (Todd Phillips) decided to make a film that challenged the feminist, left-wing narrative about toxic masculinity and the ‘white male’ (the feminist left’s scapegoat for every problem).
Our entertainment industry and particularly Hollywood, has been peddling an anti-male agenda that there is something wrong with men and masculinity for many years now. So naturally when a movie is made that encourages people to begin questioning the narrative put forward by our media that men are inherently evil and toxic, there is a backlash from the elitist feminist establishment.
Rotten Tomatoes as of the 12th of October 2019, shows a public rating of 90% for Joker and a critic rating of 68%3. Judging from the names of the publications that are rating it rotten or one/two stars, the movie has managed to annoy the right people. At approximately the same time as the Joker was released, the Batwoman tv series has been released with an 11% public rating on Rotten Tomatoes4 compared with 72% from the critics.
There has been an ideological agenda within the entertainment industry for some time now, to invade any genre that appeals predominately to men and make it about empowering women. Science fiction in particular has been targeted. This is a deliberate attempt by feminists to control the culture and ensure gynocentrism pervades every corner of society.
As we saw with The Last Jedi, the feminist influence in the film industry is not just satisfied with making movies that revolve around female empowerment at the expense of a good story, they must also make sure that their female protagonists beat and humiliate men.
People are rapidly getting tired of feminist identity politics and its showing in the public ratings of “woke” films, tv shows and video games and also in the declining purchase of products, video games and merchandise from companies that put feminist ideology before the customer.
People want to be entertained and served. People are not paying to be lectured to. Men in particular want to buy products and watch entertaining content without being told they are toxic because they happen to have penis. This will be learnt the hard way no doubt- Go woke go broke.
We live in a world where slogans like the “future is female”5 is promoted in politics and where mainstream media organisations publish articles discussing “why can’t we hate men”6. We live in a world where women can publish books7 and articles8 about the end of men, with the full support of publishers and the mainstream media. We live in a world where women receive support to run multiple public debates (see this link9 and this link10) to affirm that the male half of the human race is obsolete11 in buildings that men constructed and while men keep their lights on at night, their water running and the rest of the essential infrastructure and economy operating.
At the same time all of this is occurring, men are told we live in a patriarchy that oppresses women. We are told that men are privileged and women are victimised and how much worse women have it in society. This is the modern feminist clown world: Women claim they are oppressed in a patriarchy while women write books, articles and have debates about men being obsolete and why we should hate men. Let us honestly ask which sex is really privileged here? The sex that can openly and publicly denigrate the other sex by calling them obsolete and encouraging hatred toward them, while the other sex is told to respect them in domestic violence messaging and government funded ads no matter what. It is women that are privileged and feminist ideology is merely psychological projection by a group of entitled feminist women.
Apparently men do not have a right to exist or have a future in this society, but remember ‘it is men that are privileged.’
That is of course perfectly logically consistent for feminists, because this is the society feminism has created. Men make up the majority of our homeless, suicides and workplace deaths. They have a considerably shorter life expectancy than women and yet receive substantially less health funding for their health issues. Boys are falling far behind girls in an education system that prioritises girls needs and young men are being shut out of employment opportunities because of selective hiring and quotas that blatantly discriminate against men and favour women. Then there is the bias against men in family court and divorce that men experience. The list goes on and on.
Feminism has always been about dehumanising men to exploit them and using a false and deceitful narrative of victimhood and centuries of fictious “patriarchal” oppression to justify and rationalise that exploitation. The one constant in the feminist mind is simply this: Women matter and men don’t.
What appears to be conflicted views of the world i.e. women claiming they are being oppressed versus women claiming the future is female and men being obsolete, is really just two faces of the same bigoted gynocentric mind.
The Joker has been attacked because it challenges the assertion by the left and explicitly from feminist ideology, that we live in a patriarchy that puts male well-being above female well-being. Joker shines a light on male disposability12 and the complete lack of regard society has for the suffering and marginalisation of men and boys. But what the media really finds so irritating about the film is that it exposes the lie that male violence has its roots in toxic masculinity and the patriarchy. Men are apparently violent because of toxic masculinity and male privilege.
No other factor is at play and to utter such claims is heresy to the feminist ideological orthodoxy that now governs and runs our society. That is the message we have shoved down our throats from our domestic violence industry on a regular basis and by our elitist feminist media, governments and institutions.
There is a powerful message in the Joker– That much of male violence does not come from toxic masculinity, but from a toxic society that treats men and boys like they are garbage. A great deal of male violence is a reflection of the contempt society has for men and its complete disregard for male well-being and suffering.
That is the embarrassing truth the feminist establishment does not want to acknowledge, because they have contributed to that societal mindset. This societal mentality of apathy toward male suffering, was captured in a part of the movie when Arthur Fleck (The Joker) says:
“If it was me dying on the sidewalk, you’d walk right over me. I pass you everyday and you don’t notice me! But these guys, what, because Thomas Wayne went and cried about them on TV?” (The wealthy men on the train that beat him up get sympathy, he does not)”13
Men are expected to perform and conform. When men perform and conform, society cares about such men to the extent that they are useful to society (like Thomas Wayne and his employees).
Men are regarded as human doings in this gynocentric culture and not as human beings. Concern for male well-being is conditional on the utility they provide to society. Concern for female well-being is unconditional. Women are supported without having to do anything, they just have to exist. When men do not perform they don’t exist to society.
When men do not conform, even when they are doing no harm to themselves or others, they are demonised. When men neither conform or perform, then people call them “obsolete” and dehumanise them. We don’t see articles about women being obsolete or having to “woman up” if they do not perform for society, or books and slogans questioning women’s very right to exist and have a future. That is the difference between how society regards men and how society regards women.
Men are regarded as human doings and women are regarded as human beings. It is the gender empathy gap14. Feminism has exploited this dynamic from the very beginning15 to further prioritise female well-being at the expense of men.
Our modern gynocentric society puts men in a box. As long as men perform for society and conform to their role as an exploitable utility, they are allowed a tiny space to live out their existence. There is no room for men that want to be treated as human beings.
The moment men express any sign of vulnerability, as Arthur did, and the moment men cease being a useful utility for society, then society attacks them and literally kicks them while they are down (as Arthur was kicked down on the train).
Men like Arthur can expect no support and general apathy toward their issues from women, as we saw with Arthur’s disinterested female counsellor and dismissive single mother. Starved of any compassion from the opposite sex, Arthur has to imagine in his mind a woman having genuine concern for his well-being, expressing any form of affection for who he is and noticing him (as we later discover the relationship was all in his head).
In the real world women expect male strangers in society to take responsibility for the collective well-being of women they do not know. We see this in feminist movements like HeForShe, the promotion of male support for breast cancer awareness at major male sporting events and public domestic violence messaging targeted at men etc.
There is a clear asymmetry in the empathy women display toward men and the empathy men display toward women. This is not speculation, the lack of empathy women display toward men relative to the greater empathy men display toward women can be directly observed16. I have to laugh when it is claimed women are the more empathetic sex, whilst they write books and have debates about men being obsolete and write articles about it being acceptable to hate men. What a joke!
Arthur was different and did not perform or conform to the approved standards of being a male utility for society. For that he was mugged, fired, betrayed, mocked, publicly humiliated and beaten. The Joker gave us a glimpse of what life is like for the growing male underclass in our modern society, that the elitist feminist establishment pretends does not exist and that they have wilfully and knowingly created. This substantial cohort of men remain mostly invisible to feminists who are fixated on the tiny fraction of men at the top of society. When feminists cannot ignore their existence, these men are predictably cast by feminists as losers, threatening, creepy, violent, misogynist and dangerous.
Men can’t be victims and men can’t be vulnerable according to feminists, so they must be classed as a threat or their issues watered down and trivialised. When they can’t demonise or trivialise such men and their issues, then feminists and society attempt to reframe the narrative that women or some other identity, is the greater victim.
We can already see publications17 scrambling to try and spin the Joker to be anything but a story about male vulnerability. This is the same mentality behind remarks by politicians like Hillary Clinton that “women have always been the primary victims of war”18,, despite the millions upon millions of men that were forcibly drafted into war and died for women, their families and their country and the hundreds of war cemeteries filled with dead men.
Our gynocentric society and feminists in particular, do not want to acknowledge or accept or feel any concern for male vulnerability or suffering. This is the level of denial of reality people will stoop to, to avoid any feeling of compassion for men.
This is the reality that Joker forces them to confront.
When feminists can’t demonise, trivialise or come up with a competing victimhood narrative, we then hear from feminists that “patriarchy hurts men too”. However we never hear feminists acknowledge they are funded by (like the millions of dollars our governments spend on domestic violence against women), and are a part of the very “patriarchal” system they are supposedly dismantling, or that this system clearly prioritises female well-being above male well-being (as we can see from the numerous policies and programs in education, employment, law and health for women and girls and the comparative lack of such policies and programs for men and boys).
Have feminists ever bothered to help out the majority of the homeless and unemployed that happen to be male as Arthur was?
Have feminists ever bothered to ask men if they have been abused as children as Arthur was?
Have feminists ever bothered to consider supporting the majority of victims of violence like Arthur on the train, which are actually male not female?
Have feminists ever bothered to consider how important fathers are to boys and the young men they become, as was the case for Arthur?
Have feminists ever asked men about the hardships they experience as men and really attempted to listen to them, as Arthur was seeking from his disinterested female counsellor?
Feminism is solely interested in women and the claim the movement is about gender equality is a lie.
We see in the movie the impact that fatherlessness and single motherhood had on Arthur and the extreme abuse and neglect he suffered because of it. This film is red pilling society and will continue to red pill audiences.
The film has challenged the feminist assertion all men are privileged and has shone a light on male disposability.
Joker has exposed the role of our elitist feminist mainstream media, and complicit governments and institutions, in contributing to male violence by marginalising men, belittling them and promoting hatred toward them. That is why the elitist feminist mainstream media is so upset by the film. They know this film is exposing the truth about men and their experience in our modern man-hating society that feminists have created.
We know a gender empathy gap exists and I will start concluding this article with a quote from Alison Tieman:
“Watched Joker. Not sure what I expected but not that. Big takeaway? Offering forty-five minutes of therapy every month to try to combat the indifference, hatred and social exclusion many men face is useless. We need to fundamentally change our communities.”19
We do need to fundamentally change our communities. To that end, it might help if instead of writing books and having debates about men being obsolete and laughing and gloating about men’s suffering, our elitist feminist media and establishment did some self-reflection (particularly women in the media and our institutions) and realised their role in creating the conditions that generate male violence.
How about showing some compassion for men and boys and taking some genuine interest in implementing measures to support them like we do for women. How about respecting men and boys as human beings, rather than promoting a message that men and boys are “obsolete” like they are pieces of machinery. How about Hanna Rosin and the women like her that claim men are obsolete, get out of their airconditioned offices and go and pay the families of deceased male war veterans a visit and learn about what men have done for them and society.
I want people to go to the video embedded in this article8 and watch what Hanna Rosin does with her son. Take note of the title of the video as well. Then I want people to pause and reflect on what happens when we raise entire generations of boys in such an environment. Would we consider this acceptable if fathers were doing this to their daughters? How would we react? Be honest.
Do we really live in a patriarchy where such behaviour is actually promoted on major media websites? Remember the people that do this to their sons. Do not forget. I will never forget.
If our media, institutions, corporations and governments do not respect men as human beings, show no concern for their well-being, ignore their issues and take measures to exploit, marginalise, humiliate and demonise men for decades, then don’t be surprised if a tiny fraction of men do indeed become monsters. You should be upset because what you have done to successive generations of men and boys is shameful and reprehensible. I am glad you are upset. -Sincerely a white male.