Excerpt of http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/devlin_home_ec_01.htm:

...

First, a caveat: most critical discussions of feminism concentrate on refuting its doctrines, such as the ascription of feminine traits to upbringing rather than nature. My approach will be different. While such formal refutation of doctrines is not valueless, it seems to me to mistake the fundamental character of feminism. The feminist movement consists essentially not of ideas at all but of attitudes, or even mere emotions. Feminist "theory," as it is grandiloquently called, is simply whatever the women in the movement come up with in post facto justification of their attitudes and emotions. A heavy focus on feminist doctrine seems to me symptomatic of the rationalist fallacy: the assumption that people are motivated primarily by beliefs. If they were, the best way to combat an armed doctrine would indeed be to demonstrate that its beliefs are false. But in the case of feminism, even more than Marxism and other political ideologies, it is rather the beliefs that are motivated by various personal and nonrational needs. I propose, therefore, that feminism may be better understood through a consideration of the feminist herself.

A feminist in the strict and proper sense may be defined as a woman who envies the male role.

A Youtube broadcast by 'Thugtician:'

Kim du Toit
February 13, 2008
7:22 AM CST

The non-lawyer half of the InstaCouple says this:

“Nowadays, for many men, the negatives of marriage for men often outweigh the positives. Therefore, they engage in it less often. Not because they are bad, not because they are perpetual adolescents, but because they have weighed the pros and cons of marriage in a rational manner and found the institution to be lacking for them.”

I think women don’t understand how clinical men can be when it comes to analyzing a relationship. (Note: just because we don’t talk about our relationship with you, doesn’t mean we don’t analyze it.)

January 31, 2008 at 12:47 pm · Filed under Gonzo's Bar & Go-Go Grill

It’s been awhile. Open a brew, or pour you a shot of Jack. Bottle is on the bar. This one is on the house.

Got an e-letter the other day from a gent who asks me - in a nutshell - what happened to the old Gonz? The old MRA firebrand? Why have I just gone to doing politics nowadays?

Got me thinking.

 
I see this question posted with some regularity in the personals section, so I thought I'd take a minute to explain things to the ladies out there that haven't figured it out.

What happened to all the nice guys?

The answer is simple: you did.

by Paul Parmenter

Some serious thoughts here, Bob. But I have considerable doubts that a formally constituted Men’s Nation, or whatever structure you might propose, would necessarily work.

Once it was set up, it would immediately be under attack and vulnerable because it would constitute a target. The weakness of any formal organisation is its very formality. If it has a head, then cutting off the head kills the organisation. If it has specific funding, then cutting off the funding has the same effect. If it relies on meetings, then breaking up the meetings can stifle its growth. History is full of examples. Look at how easy it became to destroy the original F4J movement in the UK. All it took was a (probably bogus and very weak) claim in a misandric newspaper, and the structure collapsed overnight. Every structure has its weakest point, and pressure exerted on that weak point brings the whole thing down.

I suggest that a better future lies in individual men taking control of their own lives.

By Ross Mackenzie

After two generations of concern scrupulously focused on girls — their education in all its many manifestations, their alleged victimization by male dominance, their brain development, their sorrows and strengths and even the word employed to describe them (are they not, after all, young women?) — boys are coming in for new attention.

Applause, please. Yet at this late hour, with masculinity so politically incorrect, the task at hand is Augean.

Feminism vs. Male Sexuality

By Kevin Biomech

Males in our culture are damned. Not because of what we do, or even what we did or thought, but because we are male. It has become de rigeur to bash all things male, so much so that you might even find yourself believing it. In particular, feminists like to damn our sexuality. Not because they find any good reason, but because it's our biggest weakness as well as our greatest strength. Enemies always look for the loosest armour or the weakest walls.