A History of Feminism

“I saw the feminist movement cover up for PEDOPHILES”

““Lesbian and bisexual women have much more voice and respect within the movement so in the search for recognition of my struggle, with each day that passed, I deconstructed my heterosexuality and was substituting it with an artificial bisexuality.”

“hatred against men, hatred against the beauty of women, hatred against the equilibrium of families. That’s what feminism is”

– Sara Fernanda Giromin


Adam Weishaupt founder of the Order of the Illuminati

“There is no way of influencing men so powerfully as by means of the women. These should therefore be our chief study; we should insinuate ourselves into their good opinion, give them hints of emancipation from the tyranny of public opinion, and of standing up for themselves; it will be an immense relief to their enslaved minds to be freed from any one bond of restraint, and it will fire them the more, and cause them to work for us with zeal, without knowing that they do so; for they will only be indulging their own desire of personal admiration.” (Robison, John – Proofs of a Conspiracy p. 111)


…the greater the power of women and the greater the hostility towards men in a site, the more victimization the men reported.



feminist Shulamith Firestone from 2nd wave wrote:  “The incest taboo can be destroyed only by destroying the nuclear family as the primary institution of the culture”

(Her words, her book – The Dialectics of Sex).



Video on the Psychology Of White Knights, Male feminists and Manginas





Feminism exists as a defender of the selfish sexual and reproductive interests of aging and/or unattractive women. This is its entire raison d’etre, the reason it first came into existence with the social purity movement reformers of the 19th century, led by their harridan battle cry – ‘armed with the ballot the mothers of America will legislate morality’.

And legislate morality these pioneering feminists quickly did, even before they had won the vote. That is, they successfully lobbied for restrictions on prostitution, a rise in the age of consent from 12 to 16, or even 18, and the closing down of saloons where their husbands might mix freely with unattached young women.

To feminists, and indeed, to the vast majority of the female sex who give feminists the power to speak on their behalf, morality is little more than ensuring the reproductive and sexual interests of a post-peak fertility female who relies on heavy parental investment from a committed male partner. The extent of female desire for involvement in the political process is directly proportionate to the threat that women feel in a free sexual market.

And as that threat grows, so the ostensible power of feminism grows.

The history of feminism is the history of a female sexual trade union, growing in political power in exact correspondence with the steady loss of female sexual power caused by the continual widening of the sexual market. The opening up of the sex market, the ever increasing opportunities for men to gain access to cheap and anonymous sex, is the result of constantly emerging new technology, and itself completely out of the hands of feminists, or anybody else, to control or put a stop to.

Recently, W.F.Price at the Spearhead revealed that proto-feminists were lobbying the British government as far back as the 17th century when their sexual interests were seen as threatened by the emergence of male frequented coffee houses. This was a prelude to the social purity movements of the 19th century, described above, which feminist academics have always acknowledged as the birth pangs of the campaign for the vote.

But the vote was always seen as a means to the end of controlling male sexuality. Industrialisation had brought men out of the countryside and into the cities, working in close contact with women and girls in the new factories – girls who were no longer married off as soon as they reached puberty. Those same factories mass produced cheap condoms (bitterly opposed by feminists at the time), and men no longer had to fear syphilis – and could now enjoy the hundreds of thousands of prostitutes who flocked to the new cities to take their share of the working man’s growing income.

The suffragettes achieved the vote as a result of violence and of male Enlightenment thinking which saw women’s enfranchisement as a natural progression of other civil rights movements.

But in fact, women did not exercise their newly won franchise very differently then their husbands, and when they did vote differently, it was to vote in fascist dictatorships throughout Europe. It was not until the 1960′s, and the second wave of feminism, that women began voting significantly differently from men…

The 1960′s saw the beginning of possibly the most remarkable event in human history – the end of ‘patriarchy.’ Within the space of a generation, a social system that had endured in every corner of the globe throughout recorded history had more or less crumbled.

In every corner of the globe…except the Islamic world.

In his book The Decline of the Male, anthropologist Lionel Tiger identifies the introduction of the contraceptive pill as the trigger for this unparalleled social revolution, the ‘second wave of feminism.’ For Lionel Tiger, the pill shifted reproductive power from men to women, for men could no longer be sure as to the paternity of their offspring.

I don’t accept all of the details of Tiger’s thesis, but I agree wholeheartedly that the pill was a catalyst for the second wave of feminism

An unforeseen technological innovation had revolutionised sexual relations and, in a blind and uncontrollable way, had transformed society almost overnight.

According to most feminist thinkers (and many MRAs), the pill gave women power over men. I disagree. In fact, it was male sexuality that was liberated by the pill, and women – or at least older/unattractive women – were left dangerously exposed in the free sexual market that had suddenly been created.

Suddenly, women became active in politics. Suddenly, women demanded (and won) the right to university education, to a career, to easy divorce, to an abortion. Suddenly male politicians had to legislate according to the female vote.

The pill did not give women power over men.

The pill forced women to take power from men.

But, of course, this did not happen in the majority of Muslim societies. Under Islam, there is still no free sexual market, and thus unattractive Muslim women have no need for feminism.

The astonishing and sudden representation of women at all levels of government over the last decade may fairly be described as the Third Wave of Feminism. In just one or two decades, from having virtually zero representation in high government, the female sex has come to near dominate many of the leading democracies of the West, even in South America.

Alongside formal governmental representation, largely female dominated non-governmental pressure groups have suddenly come to hold massive sway over an increasingly powerful United Nations, as well as other international bodies such as the European Union.

Why has this astonishing Third Wave, no less extraordinary than the Second, suddenly come about? That this is the first generation of women raised as feminists no doubt has played a part but it cannot alone explain the sheer rapidity of change. Like the first and second waves of feminism, the third has been propelled by technological progress threatening the sexual interests of ordinary women.

The globalisation of society and of communications has threatened to further open up the free sexual market to an extent as great as the pill itself did.

Suddenly men had before them a whole new array of alternatives to a ‘real’ sexual relationship, from the cheap Polish hooker at the street corner, to the nubile young slut showing herself on cam from her bedroom half way across the world.

This was a brave new sexual world that an already politicised generation of middle-aged women could not tolerate for long…and certainly not entrust to men to control or put an end to.

The Future of Feminism

The future of feminism will be dictated by the same forces that have shaped its history – blind and largely uncontrollable economic and technological changes continuing to widen the free sexual market.

The further increase in mass global communications, advances in robotics, 3D and holographic porn, virtual sex, and the growing realism and popularity of male sex toys, are all rapidly coalescing into a perfect storm that will either achieve sexual and emotional independence for men…or a fourth wave of feminism even more terrible and damaging than the rest.




Man Woman Myth origins of feminism


ManWomanMyth – Feminism – Feminism in a Nutshell


Origins of Feminism part 1

part 2

 part 3


Science Proves that Feminists are manly and ugly.

Feminist activist women are masculinized in terms of digit-ratio and social dominance: a possible explanation for the feminist paradox


The feminist movement purports to improve conditions for women, and yet only a minority of women in modern societies self-identify as feminists. This is known as the feminist paradox. It has been suggested that feminists exhibit both physiological and psychological characteristics associated with heightened masculinization, which may predispose women for heightened competitiveness, sex-atypical behaviors, and belief in the interchangeability of sex roles. If feminist activists, i.e., those that manufacture the public image of feminism, are indeed masculinized relative to women in general, this might explain why the views and preferences of these two groups are at variance with each other. We measured the 2D:4D digit ratios (collected from both hands) and a personality trait known as dominance (measured with the Directiveness scale) in a sample of women attending a feminist conference. The sample exhibited significantly more masculine 2D:4D and higher dominance ratings than comparison samples representative of women in general, and these variables were furthermore positively correlated for both hands. The feminist paradox might thus to some extent be explained by biological differences between women in general and the activist women who formulate the feminist agenda.


more at http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01011/full



Women and the KKK roots of modern feminism


For decades we have wrestled with feminism. Too many men and women still say they are feminists on the assumption feminism seeks equality – a prevarication drilled into our heads by feminists for 50 years.

When you watch the feet and ignore the lips, the primary political and social goals of feminism are obvious. The core feminist agenda all along has been the destruction of marriage, the persecution of men, the killing of unborn children, gratuitous self-victimization and entitling a massive welfare state.

This column is not sensationalist click-bait. It is a brief tour through a real part of American history. What you read here is historical fact. The root ideologies and slogans of feminism as we know it today were drafted by members of the Women’s Ku Klux Klan (WKKK) beginning in the 1880s. This is documented by Kathleen L. Blee in her book “Women of the Klan.”

Below is a brief synopsis of what is proven in “Women of the Klan.”

The WKKK played a controlling role in the KKK. Early feminists in the WKKK demanded great power in the Klan, applying powerful sexual imagery to get it. Women were placed on a pedestal of motherly sexual purity requiring knee-jerk protection from black men. WKKK activists quickly discovered that the power of sexual victimization was just as effective against white men, too.

In the late 1880s, a broadside was published by the Evansville, Indiana, WKKK chapter proclaiming; “No longer will man say that in the hand of woman rests the necessity of rocking a cradle only. She has within her hand the power to rule the world.” This and other early radical feminist mottoes reappeared in the suffragette movement and the 1960s as a core agenda of the “great society” and sexual liberation revolutions.

The WKKK established many memes and institutions still central to contemporary feminism. Motherhood was drudgery. The YWCA was established to offload child care. Abortion of black babies was urged in cohort with Margaret Sanger.

Women exercised sexual power fluently. The movie “Rosewood” documents a white woman claiming rape by a black man to cover up for an affair she was having, resulting in a massacre of blacks in the town of Rosewood, Florida. The KKK was also America’s first child-support collection agency and a prototype for our one-eyed Title IV-D system.

Elizabeth Tyler, the first WKKK grand chief of staff, seized control of the KKK, removing Grand Dragon Simmons by accusing him of sexual improprieties. She replaced him with her paramour whom she controlled along with the membership of the Klan. By 1925, the WKKK had about 4 million members – a very large organization in those days.

One reviewer of Kathleen Blees’ book wrote, “The significance of ‘Women of the Klan’ rests not in its somewhat ebullient celebration of feminist principles, but rather, that it documents in great detail a direct lineage between the Women’s Ku Klux Klan and the radical feminist movement as it exists today. The book draws from a wide variety of historical documents, letters, and in-camera interviews that the author recorded with older women who were still alive at the time the book was written.”

Contemporary feminism still functions on the same visceral sexual-political mechanics as the WKKK. By the 1960s, the feminist machine was now armed with Freudian victim psychology and Kinsey’s sexual liberation agenda, expounded by degreed professional feminists (“women’s studies” majors).

Old Frankfurt school Marxism previously ineffective in America was retargeted by Herbert Marcuse, who theorized that contented middle-class America could be divided and destroyed by a youthful sexual revolution. The rise of Saul Alinsky’s New Marxist movement created a generation of politically powerful young Americans bent on destroying their own country.

The KKK collapsed about the same time radical feminism rose to prominence because feminists re-pointed their agenda at all men, not just black men. They demanded equality, destruction of “the Patriarchy,” evisceration of religion and special protections for “liberated” women.

The only difference between racism and contemporary sexism is the target of social and economic repression. Racism focused on black males, but feminism targets all males.

Racism did not truly end with the rise of feminism. Black males bear the brunt of feminist policy. When boys do not grow up expecting to be fathers and husbands, how can black Americans succeed? Black males, as a group, are the most likely to end up in prison or dead at an early age. The ejection of black men from the own communities is the primary reason they are so easy to recruit into radical masculist Muslim activism.

Meanwhile, black females are provided massive social and educational supports along with preferential treatment getting “apron ready” jobs they are often unqualified for. Welfare is an entitlement for women and a sentence to indentured servitude for men funded by governmental socioeconomic destruction of marriage – especially in the lower classes.

Today, one-third of children are raised by unmarried mothers supported with our tax dollars. Child support is then forcefully collected from low-income men (who must support themselves, too). From a policy perspective, it is madness to destroy marriage with welfare state “income guarantees” that are also recoupments, expecting the poor to lift the poor out of poverty.

Most of these children lack necessary parental and economic resources that cannot be effectively replaced by government. We spend 30 times more per-capita on welfare than China does and wonder why so many children are failing in school. Congress has been unable to balance the budget – so it raises the debt ceiling another notch every few months.

Indeed, as much as 70% of poverty would be erased if fathers and mothers simply married – a policy direction professional feminists discount as meaningless.

Feminist policy has left more women barefoot, pregnant and in poverty than any other event in American history. It is time we hold feminists squarely responsible for it – which Phyllis Schlafly accomplished in her new book “Who Killed the American Family?” In this short column, Dr. Gina Loudon proves the “eight important benefits of marriage, controverting nearly the entirety of the feminist agenda.

There is scant evidence feminism impacted public policy positively. Feminists have little girls dressed up as sexy princesses using filthy language. At age 24, there are 148 women with college degrees for every 100 men. The “gender pay gap” is a reflection of women’s choices. Rape rates have declined significantly since 1973 – long before feminist policy kicked in. Women now commit at least half of all serious domestic violence. Widely disseminated feminist myths about domestic violence have been thoroughly debunked. A crisis of child sex abuse in schools is perpetrated by female teachers, who rarely go to prison, and nobody is doing anything about it.

The feminist power agenda has caused serious problems on college campuses. California just enacted “Yes Means Yes,” a widely criticized law converting college life into a witch hunt for a non-existent campus rape “crisis.” This law was thoroughly eviscerated by feminists Camille Paglia in Time magazine, Margaret Wente in the United Kingdom, professor Alan Dershowitz, and challenged by at least 30 men suing colleges for discriminatory dismissal.

The feminist movement is falling out of favor in public. Many young Americans see that feminism is a cult and reject it on its face. Voters are learning that feminism is the movement driving liberalism, socialism, taxes, deficits, dystopian government, and our nation’s greatest social and criminal problems. Even in massively liberal Portland, Oregon, feminism is on the skids. The feminist bookstore featured in the TV show “Portlandia” is going out of business for lack of paying customers.

Unfortunately, professional feminists have firm control of government, law schools, universities and media – forcing their agenda on the rest of us. We must strive for more balance in perches of power. Title IX holds the keys to end the reign of radical feminist sexism. We must establish new, sensible supply-side socioeconomic policy focusing on rebuilding the marriage culture and a pro-social God-loving country.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/10/feminism-todays-womens-ku-klux-klan/#crcHQp3w7oeYUUcA.99