Evils of Traditionalism

From my perspective, traditionalism was a necessary evil up until the industrial revolution. Feminism was a necessary evil to destroy the cushy lifestyle and gynocentric advantage that traditionalists enjoyed after the industrial revolution. That’s about the only good thing that has come from it. Feminists have gone too far, of course, and have untold amounts of blood on their hands. They are enemy #1 in the realm of human rights and public discourse. But Feminists and traditionalists are cut from the same gynocentric cloth. Where Feminists believe in female victimhood and legal supremacy, it is my contention that traditionalists essentially believe in female moral superiority and “lead-from-the-bottom” social supremacy.

I’m glad to have traditional women fighting alongside MRAs and MGTOW to end the reign of terror by big-F Feminism. We need all the help we can get. But once that goal is achieved and we are standing in the ashes of Feminist machinations, it will be time to turn to them and say, “about that moral superiority…”

So I’m glad we have an enemy in common, and would indeed recognize a non-aggression pact between traditionalists and MRA/MGTOW for the time being. But how similar are we? How intimate is our connection? How long can we stay friends? Once Feminism is destroyed, is it back to the homestead and easy, sheltered, protected-and-provided-for lifestyle for women? Is it back to marriage-as-usual? Is it back to making a mockery of the male emotional matrix and using the protection of “his fragile ego” to cover her own transgressions? MRAs are oft accused of wanting to “turn back the clocks to the ’50s,” but isn’t that what traditionalists want to do?

Traditionalism in the pre-industrial era has had plenty of dark underpinnings (to be fair, from both sexes) that need to be addressed in the post-industrialized world, and especially in the post-service-revolution world. So what would the modern post-industrial, post-service “traditional,” or “trad-prog,” family arrangement looks like? Which traditional values are conserved? Which are dispensed with?

Parents (esp. Fathers) need to examine and scrutinize all educational curricula and material their children are exposed to in school.

The blue-piller is unaware of the reality that surrounds him. Feminists and traditionalists control the discourse. The pick-up artist refutes the feminist and traditional discourse, but in PUA terms, his willy “controls the frame,” not his sovereign mind. He is not fully “red-pill.” He is defined and constrained by his pursuit of sex. A complete red-piller is either a man going his own way, a men’s advocate, or a human rights advocate.

The entry point of the Myth of Feminism into the public discourse is centered around the exploitation of the biological caveat of men that has allowed society to enroll them as producers and protectors, and partly expendable. It seeks to magnify these positions and make them slaves, meat-shields and dispensers-of-violence, and fully disposable.

What are ideas that are constructed of a mixture of observations of objective reality and Feminist Bullshit? It must also be Feminist Bullshit, or if it needs another name, to be treated, as Feminist Bullshit in the way that it is a useless product for discourse, except for the inspection and deconstruction of the Myth of Feminsm.

In Feminism Poisons Women: A Political Statement, Fidelbogen outlined a strategy to form a collective consciousness and internal dialog among non-feminist men and women. He stated that this consciousness would operate completely outside the Myth of Feminism. To that end, I propose that any who are interested should start a project to delineate all Feminist Bullshit in the public discourse. I will provide a definition of Feminist Bullshit here.

Feminst Bullshit: All vocal, written, and graphic rhetorical impulse applied to public discourse, individual interaction, and organizations from feminist advocates.

That is to say, if it is feminist lie, feminist half-lie, or predicated on either of these things, it is Feminist Bullshit. It can be said that the Myth of Feminism is the body of Feminist Bullshit.

You can advocate for the well-being of women without feminism. Attacks on feminism are not attacks on the advocacy for women. Feminism isn’t for women. Feminism isn’t even for feminists.

Smash the Gynocracy

We’ve all suffered it — men and women alike. In one form or another, in one way or another, directly or indirectly. Preferential treatment toward women has adversely affected each of us. This is manifest in myriad ways which will be explored on this site. Exploring the topic is not enough, though. I want gynocentric culture to end, and to that effect, I present Antigynocentrism, a site dedicated to practical, actionable ways to persuade society at large to treat men at least as well as it treats women.

Right now there is no content, but that will change. In the meantime, the best thing you can do if you’re interested in the subject is the first understand gynocentrism — exactly what it is, how it manifests, what its consequences are, how to protect yourself from it, and its history. So I recommend you start by checking out gynocentrism.com, a thorough exposé on the subject and valuable resource.
Some areas that will be explored on this site include:

• Male Disposability
• Misandry/Misandric Fixation
• Feminism
• Marriage/Divorce-Industrial-Complex
• Reproductive Rights/Debtor’s Prison
• Male Stoicism/Emotional Matrix
• “Man up!”/Real Man
• Mating/Dating
• Battle of the Sexes
• Public Funding
• Sexual Negotiation

This is not meant to be an all-inclusive list, but rather a good starting point from which to expand. More topics may be added later, and some of these might not get their own focus. It all depends on how the site grows.

Check back irregularly to stay abreast of progress.