A couple of days ago my E-mail address was added to a mailing list temporarily constructed so that every message sent went to all people on the list. This list was created to facilitate the dissemination of and get responses to the results of a case filed against the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and was shut down after a few hours. I didn’t originate any messages (though I responded to one sent to me) but I received 30 E-mails within a couple of hours. This group apparently consisted primarily of so-called Men’s Rights Organizations (MROs) or supporters of them. They complain, they even try to act tough occasionally, but they are completely ineffective in their objective to rectify what they perceive as wrongs heaped upon men by government. I bring some of the details of this incident to your attention for they clearly illustrate the feminine and materialistic thinking that pervades MROs.
I state before proceeding with this essay that I have previously made my views known about the VAWA and its sponsor Senator Biden and will not go into it further here.
One of the 30 E-mails I received came from someone complaining about the stance that the MROs often take. Listed below is an unedited paragraph taken from that E-mail:
Like it or not, the advent of the Industrial Revolution in 1820 and the ensuing Technological Revolution that has taken place, is the “Great Equalizer” between the sexes freeing them from Me Tarzan You Jane set the stage for women to assert their rights (especially during and after WWII where there was a group effort to defeat the Axis powers. Feminism has paved the way for men to become more aware of their gender roles and cultural expectations and create Maleism. I believe there should be a more egalitarian system where men and woman’s differences are acknowledged and honored.
This paragraph expressed the general tenor of the E-mail but was unsigned. I wanted to reply to the author but before I did I asked for the writer’s name, as I do not respond to people who do not leave their names. I also thought the writer was a woman given the supposedly positive effects that evolved from feminism stated in the message.
The writer did respond and it was a man. Lest I misinterpreted the first E-mail he wrote the following paragraph in the second E-mail:
Technology is the great equalizer. No longer do men have to go into battle and be torn to pieces because they are physically stronger than women. Swords and knives have given way to guns, bombs, drone aircraft, tanks, etc., which can be operated by both men and women with equal ease. Anyone can pull a trigger or push a button to launch a rocket or fly a drone from the comfort of a base 1000’s of miles away from the war. The lack of a stable front line in Iraq has put women in combat situations equal to a man’s rather than being kept in the rear of a front line, yet another step toward gender equality. Women are proving their mettle in combat situations. Talk to a male solider whose butt was saved by a woman soldier about men being the authoritarians. They no doubt will have a different spin on things.
These two paragraphs serve as excellent examples of feminine materialistic Western thought, which I often refer to. “Technology is the great equalizer” and “the advent of the Industrial Revolution is the great equalizer,” reflects gross materialism. He cannot imagine that technology will pass away but life will remain, and that life is dependent upon patriarchy for its functioning and survival. Those statements reflect extreme arrogance as well for they imply the power of man supersedes the power of God or nature.
Also in referring to rights the writer does not reflect on where rights come from. What is the power that defines a right and bestows it? It must come from outside of oneself, hence all the efforts of the MROs to gain “rights” through legal action. That’s pure feminine thinking. They believe the power is outside of them instead of within them; therefore, they are victims. If only they could get the government to change the laws then their lives will be better. There are no natural rights in this world; there are obligations, responsibilities, and considerations. Once men realize that power resides within they will understand that change can only be made outside of the government and the economy; however, that requires another trait not found within the confines of feminine materialistic Western thought and that is conceptual understanding.
They do not have the concept that all movement depends upon an assertive influence acting upon a receptive entity. They do not realize that there is one assertive force in the universe and it is called the masculine gender. They do not realize that the feminine gender thinks in personal, materialistic and immediate terms because those traits enable it to nurture the race. By the way “nurture” never seems to enter the lexicon of MROs or feminists. They do not realize that women deal in the seen and men deal in the unseen. They do not have the concept that the unseen God created the material universe and the unseen conceptual thinking of men created the material world that sits upon it. They do not possess the concept that man’s primary obligation is the propagation and preservation of the species on its journey of spiritual unfoldment, and that his specific responsibility is to provide the means and the environment for women to bring forth life and nurture it. They do not ask what the attraction would be for the opposite sex in an egalitarian society and what its purpose would be.
This thinking has permeated Western thought since the days of Plato; he believed that men and women were the same and that children should be turned over to the State to be raised. That’s what we have today. The author of the above paragraphs in lauding women in combat makes no mention of who is taking care of their children, and “care” is the most that they get today, for nurturing disappeared when the family was destroyed. I am also amazed at his equanimity of thought as he narrates how women are trained to destroy life instead of bring it into existence.
Lastly, the author wrote in his E-mail to me that in looking over the Men’s Action website he determined that I am angry. In the 18 years that I have promoted my message of gender and patriarchy I have never been called angry by a woman. A few feminists might have gotten angry with me, but they did not call me angry. Only men have called me angry, and a particular group of men at that. Those who do not have the courage to assume their manly responsibilities of providing for a wife and family or those who cannot accept their contribution to a failed marriage call me angry. They are intimidated by my message, and I do feel for them. I have friends and acquaintances in that category. They were usually raised in dysfunctional homes and were not prepared to cope with the responsibilities of manhood. Part of any movement to rebuild society and the family requires rebuilding the man as the first step.
This same group of men that considers me to be angry also asks me what the women say about my message. They wonder if I get in trouble with them. I will tell you what the women say. I have E-mails from women around the world and they support me and nurture me. They are happy to see a man that supports family and the natural relationship of men to women. I wonder if the current crop of MROs gets letters like that. If there is any question about my feelings towards women let them look at the recent series of seven videos I made titled The Natural Woman, especially part 3 in which I mention the commitment I made to women.
In my references to Western thought I have never referred to the terms white, black, Asian or Hispanic. People of all colors, ethnicities, and religions have been indoctrinated in and accept Western thought. The MROs, liberals, democrats, conservatives, republicans, independents, progressives, socialists, and libertarians all have one trait in common—materialistic myopic Western thought. Political science is a study of forms of government created by Western thought that attempt to substitute for patriarchy and fail.
To change society requires a change in thinking. Unless a man is reborn, nothing will change. Men need to crawl out of the restrictive confines of materialistic Western thought and recognize their responsibility to the propagation and preservation of the human race on its spiritual journey. They also have to develop the vitality and courage to fulfill that responsibility.
E.G.
