Guiding young men

When I was young, I had the typical fantasies of kicking ass and getting the girl. In my old age the fantasy has switched to inventing something that would take care of some societal ill.
Yet, even this fantasy is selfish when it comes to being supportive to other men. For, if you bring some treasure from the mountain peak to give to society, a child will think ”This adult will take care of me. This is good.” A woman will think ”This man will look after me. This is good.” And a man will think ”This man has proven he is worth more than me. Society may have no use for me”.

There is a reason Merlin didn’t just stamp his staff and declare that Arthur is king. He set Excalibur in stone for Arthur to take action on his own. And afterwards, Merlin was there to support/advise Arthur during Arthur’s reign.
Good King Wencelas didn’t bear his Page’s burden for him but guided him to the best path.
Sorastro of Mozart’s Die Zauberflote expanded the prince’s purpose beyond being with his lover to the pursuit of knowledge and truth. Sorastro put him through tests that challenged him as a person. The prince was enticed to join the brotherhood

For better or worse, a man has to accomplish something for himself. Psychologically, a man can’t just receive gifts and flourish. Shaolin monks are men who have left the rat race of status yet they are nevertheless on a path of their own making.

A father who has renown or accomplishment cast a long shadow over his son even though that isn’t his intent. It’s better for a young man to have a mentor who is at a distance. Who lacks that sort of connection. He can stand far enough away where his shadow can’t reach.
Encouraging a purpose outside a roof, car and a romantic partner is what we should do.


Trevor Cormier


We live in a female supremacist culture that drowns out the facts.

This is the wikipedia article on the Marissa Alexander case. A violent female was in a mutually abusive relationship, and she fired a gun at her husband in the same room as her kids

The wikipedia article omits a lot of facts. Compare this article to the wikipedia article.

You can clearly see the facts that the wikipedia article omitted.

If you search for the case on google, you get a lot of female supremacist nonsense, and lies. it is very hard to find objective articles using the google search engine.

Also Marissa’s husband who is a black male is being  silenced, he is painted as a violent abusive sub human, deserving of death. Rico Gray is not a sub human, just because he is male. Violent women do not have the right to beat, abuse and kill men with impunity.

Also I have seen trash articles by left wing black males throwing Rico Gray under the bus, and supporting the right of violent abusive women to lash out and try and kill men they are in relationships with.

Females are not a higher caste, men are not a sub human caste, I reject the female imperative, women do not have a right to dish out violence as they see  fit, and label their male victims as abusers deserving of death.

Thug women who enjoy being in mutually abusive relationships for the drama, are not victims, they are damaged deranged women with serious mental health problems that need jailing when they break the law, and serious medical help. Instead society enables their abusive violent ways.

Also Marissa fired her gun in the same room as her children.

Thanks to feminists campaigning  for Marissa’s release, a violent thug bitch is released and  involved in the lives of her children again, a violent thug bitch who believes she is a righteous victim. She is a danger to her kids, and a bad influence. A disgusting psychopath who picks fights in front of her kids, to get her domestic violence drama fix.

No one cares about the children, the female imperative always comes first.




Proof That Karen Straughan Is An Anti Male, Enabler Of Trad Con Nut Jobs.


At the 4 minute 20 mark this trad con PUA nut job calls drunken sex at night clubs borderline rape. This Person is a defacto male feminist in his belief system.

Sasha has all sorts of kooky beliefs, nonsense about the divine feminine, magical thinking can stop crime, etc….

Karen is getting a response video soon, it is time she gets some real push back from some real MRA’s

Also some trad con nut jobs are trying to gang up on the people who are objecting to Karens choice of guest. Some of the abuse they are dishing out is identical to feminist abuse.


Sasha did this creepy cringy video. Full of Male victim hood, men groveling for mercy from women. Men should not be encouraged to hit on random women in the street, as that will only get men into legal trouble.

Trad con’s who are obsessed with relationships should be kept out of the MRM completely.

An Example Of Feminists Trying to Sabotage A Wikipedia Article


A wikipeida user has noticed a feminist trying to sabotage an article on the women are wonderful effect. Information that completely counters the feminist narrative. The person who wrote this is anonymous as he is an unsigned user.


This article was linked to me and I couldn’t help but notice all the biased statements and incorrect citations in it which I have removed.

It has become apparent to me after reviewing this article’s history that almost all of this was the result of one user, MurderByDeadcopy, who has repeatedly tried to control this article for their own personal reasons.

The statements I have removed were off topic, unverifiable, or blatantly manipulative. This is not an article to discuss workplace sexism or the definitions of various types of stereotypes. If these topics are somehow relevant then please link to articles discussing those topics rather than expanding this article with several paragraphs of descriptions that are clearly only being used to bias the information.

However, when I did see, is that several citations of statements being added by MurderByDeadcopy do not in fact support those statements. An example of this is their attempt to cite the phrase “women are wonderful when” which is nowhere present in their citation. Simply searching for “wonderful” in that citation shows this as it only shows up twice and not in this context. They also make a statement regarding gender roles and cite a paper discussing gender roles but the statement is not about if gender roles exist or not. The statement is that the effect discussed in this article is tainted by only impacting women in certain roles. This statement requires its own citation, simply citing a paper discussing gender roles is not a proper citation for this information.

It is my opinion that any edits from MurderByDeadcopy should be considered biased going forward.

Somehow this user went from asking why this article should even exist and trying to get it deleted to expanding it with several paragraphs of unnecessary, off topic, and uncited information. I think this alone shows bias let alone the specific examples I mentioned above of false citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:42, 3 February 2016 (UTC)”

The feminist trying to sabotage the article chimes in the talk page and babbles a load of nonsense.

  • I still believe there is too much undue weight given to this article, but I feared too much grief from MRA’s to delete/merge it. I also, had zero idea about the outcome of this article, but you appear to have definite demands regarding gender roles. I just wanted to add more than one RS to the article. The original researchers who coined the phrase, research relationships within the workplace, so much of the research is tied to info about work. If you want to delete the In-Group area, go for it. It was kept due to other editors.
I do not appreciate being called a bunch of names so quit. —MurderByDeletionism“bang!” 10:37, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Notice the feminist gaslighting tactic of telling people what they believe. What the anonymous user said in no way even implies any demands when it comes to gender roles.

The anonymous wiki user replies to the feminist wiki user MurderByDeletionism


“You have included irrelevant statements, incorrect citations, and all while saying you don’t know why this article is even allowed to exist. So you’re simultaneously wanting to expand this article but also eliminate it entirely? This further lays bare your bias regarding this article. The Talk page is already full of several other editors arguing with you regarding this irrelevancy. Then you go on to say “don’t call me names, I quit” and then you come back shortly after to continue editing this article. I’ve never once called you a “name.” I’ve called you biased as evidenced by your own actions. As I just said, how are you wanting to expand this article and also delete it entirely or merge it? All this shows is your real goal is to obfuscate the content of this article through any means necessary.

To quote the Wikipedia:Rules:

“Wikipedia:Neutral point of view is the most important rule in changing pages.”

Your actions, in my opinion, clearly indicate that you are biased in your changing of this page and that you should not edit it any further. I hope I don’t need to review your other edits as well because I honestly don’t want to. I don’t care about this article and was only linked here by someone mentioning the “women are wonderful effect” and while reading the article I saw such obvious bias I was curious and checked the Talk page and then decided to go revise the original article to remove that irrelevant wrapper that had been placed around it by you in spite of several other people here complaining about the same thing.

I’m going to let this go because I care about Wikipedia and unbiased editors. Go ahead and appeal this to someone with more authority because until a project administrator tells me to stop reverting your edits OR you actually present a valid reason to include your edits on the Talk page I will continue to remove them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by73.35.134.190 (talk) 10:51, 4 February 2016 (UTC)”


The feminist makes one more time to sprout his nonsense.

  • I agree. Let’s get a third party involved. Because I’ve asked you to stop calling me names and it’s clear that you are not going to do that.
  • ( The Feminist like a mental case, accuses the other user of calling him name, when he clearly did not, that is a classic gas-lighting tactic. False accusations of name calling is a common feminist tactic.)
  • Every single statement I’ve added I backed with a reliable source. And eliminated personal injector. Whenever this article gets changed by eliminating sources, that’s when the biases occur. More info, not less info on anysubject helps to create less bias. Pull from one or two sources and the increase of biases increases.

Like I’ve said before, I don’t believe one example of ambivalent sexism deserves a whole article since it is just a stating of what’s already here. I really would enjoy working with someone on this article, however, no one sticks around and reads the sources. It’s impossible to work on any article without reading the sources. Usually someone comes along whose pro-MRA or TRP and just wants to slant the article to that bias. Yes it’s a terrible thing that society pushes men into aggressive traits, however, it’s also a terrible thing that society pushes women into niceness traits. No human wants to be either all the time or judged as being either. There’s a whole range of traits and if certain traits are pushed upon one because of gender, resentment happens.

The reply is babbling nonsense. The concept of ambivalent sexism is feminist nonsense, the concept is feminist mental gymnastic to try and explain away female privilege. There is no ambivalent sexism, there is only female privilege. White people in the past  in the southern USA who had more legal rights than black people, did not suffer  from ambivalent racism, they had racial privilege.

The wiki talk page is worth keeping an eye on, and worth reading.

Sadly on most other wikipedia pages feminists have a lot more swey and say, and ruined many articles related to men’s issues.

Feminists are malicious and want to suppress certain types information to defend female privilege. There can be no compromise with feminists, they have to be treated like a hate movement.

We need laws banning and outlawing feminism, it is as simple as that.

Feminism does not belong in public life. If they are allowed any breathing space they will worm their way into spaces and co-opt them. Feminism is anti science, as it is currently damaging the scientific method in the modern world right now. MurderByDeadcopy at first tried deleting the woman are wonderful effect article, when he failed to do that, he resorted to sabotage.

2018 a year with misandry on the rise.

The Metoo hashtag is growing from strength to strength, even more men have been destroyed by that online witch hunt.  Even mainstream celebrities have endorsed the metoo hashtag. Metoo is not going away any time soon.  Even if the tag declines, online witch hunts will still carry on without the tag. Women are getting no push back for their malicious attacks against men.

The feminist invasion of popular culture marches on, and has trashed franchises like Starwars, Dr Who, and even star trek. Delusional right wingers believe in a self correcting cycle, and that “get woke, go broke” will fix things.  Yet even after the blatant failure of feminist Kathleen Kennedy,  she has still kept her position at the head of Lucasarts in charge of the Starwars franchise. The free market will not fix the feminist invasion of geek culture. I am sure feminists will find other spaces to trash in 2019 as well.

Also anti SJW’s the main front line in the geek culture wars, have no ideological understanding of feminism, and falsely believe they are fighting Marxists, or even liberals. They have a faulty frame of reference, and always get derailed into left vs right politics, and play into the hands of their feminist enemies.

In the UK I have seen talk in the media of giving female domestic violence victims free unpaid leave. (Like that is is not going to be abused.)

UK police had to drop hundreds of rape cases, hundreds of men falsely accused. (click the link for details)

I can list countless more examples of the damage feminism has done to the legal system. I do not want this blog post to be too long though.

Circumcision is still legal, and Iceland had a failed vote to ban the vile practice. The intactivist movement is still an utter failure. They failed to take advantage of the Iceland vote to raise awareness.

The Men’s right movement is still stagnating,it is still a right wing ghetto. The biggest men’s rights platform A Voice For Men, is trad con and full of conspiracy nuts waffling on about leftists.

Honey Badger radio has doubled down on their right wing pandering, and enables right wing nut jobs in their interviews.  Many of the honey badgers have kooky right wing views themselves.  They shill for money, and do not seem to put it to good use.

The right has invented a new term, soyboy, to attack and disparage other men, the right love inventing new pejoratives that target men. I am sure they will invent new ones in 2019

The trad cons carry on doubling down with their toxic marriage obsession.

MGTOW is still a shit show, full of strong man posturing, and obsessing over relationships.

The incel community is of course toxic, the community itself is anti male, and the term incel is used by people outside the community as a pejorative so they can dismiss the concerns of men. The label is also used as thought terminating cliche to stop the conversation, if the  true nature of females is brought up. The facts about female hypergamy tend to trigger people a lot.

Misandry is only going to continue to get worse unless there is some sort of push back. I sadly do not see that push back coming from anywhere right now. Men are without direction or understanding when it comes to their own issues.

Men have less rights than women, Men get less protection from society, men are not even able to escape into their hobbies without females trashing them. Female social dominance is more or less complete, men are utterly defeated and subjugated by women, men are submissive to women, and lack self regard for themselves as men.

The only thing we can do is try and grow something pro male for 2019. I plan to use this blog and my youtube channel to do that. Growth of my channel is really slow though. Pro male ideas are not appealing to the masses, as they look for simplistic scapegoats for their problems instead.

A right wing conspiracy nut wrote something called the misandry bubble and predicted that misandry would correct itself by 2020. This is of course wishful thinking, and is not going to happen. Misandry will most likely be worse in 2020.

click here to look at the blog post.


Left wingers are in denial about female nature, and the subordinate position of men to women.

Right wingers are in denial about female nature and believe someone has brainwashed them into hating men.

There are no pro male groups as far as I can see, except this one. This is not a boast but a sad observation.

I hope I can encourage more men to speak up. We need as many pro male men to speak up in 2019 as possible.

2018 was building up a movement from scratch, lets see what progress can be made in 2019