When Shit Gets Sold as Soap…

In Articles, NO-MAAM
April 24, 2021
Juan Galt
395 Views
2 comments

Foundations of MGTOWJuan Galt, Senior Editor MisandryToday

There is no secret patriarchy – but there is a secret matriarchy

nope its soap not shit

Yes, it’ll get you squeaky clean and make you smell good too!

Have you ever noticed how much of feminism could be classified as a form of projection? Collective projection, to be more accurate. Virtually every accusation that the feminist movement levels against men could easily be seen as women projecting their own behaviors onto others (men), and this is why, I believe, that women are so prone to believe that men are doing all of these evil things to them – because they can identify with such behaviour inside of themselves.

First, let’s look at the whole false notion of the super-sized “boy’s club-cabal” floating around out there, occasionally referred to as The Patriarchy.

As pretty much every man with an ounce of common sense and observational abilities will declare, there just is no freakin’ Patriarchy anywhere to be found out there.

Men do not give other men special treatment because they are men. In fact, most men will readily attest that it’s a dog eat dog world and we’re all wearing Milk Bone underwear. Have a look at some of the completely ludicrous accusations that have been leveled against men – like the wild notion that men get better deals when they buy cars because they have testicles between their legs. What freakin’ nonsense! As any man reading this will readily attest to, nowhere in our economic system will another man give me money, or choose to make less profit on me because I belong to the male sex.

I have never experienced the far reaching benefits of the Patriarchy, nor have I ever experienced any boy’s club that tries to discriminate against, or exclude women from anything – well, not since I was 8 years old and tried to keep girls out of my tree fort.

I have never worked at a place where the men secretly conspired to give each other advantages over female co-workers… but I have experienced working at places where myself and my male co-workers have caught several women conspiring in secrecy to make sure that women outperformed their male co-workers. It happened when I was working in a high-pressure commission sales environment. It was a fair sized staff, 12 in sales (11 men, 1 woman), 3 in management (2 men, 1 woman), and 3 receptionists (all women). Now, don’t go thinking it was discriminatory that there were 11 men and only 1 woman on the sales staff. The general manager tried and tried to increase the ratio of women on his staff, and hired several women while I was there, but the women he hired just kept quitting, some in tears, because they couldn’t cope with the high pressure of commission sales.

What was discovered by myself and my male co-workers, however, was that the three receptionists were sending double the amount of first-time customers & phone calls to the lone saleswoman, and the female manager was turning over double the amount of clients to the saleswoman as she was to the men.

When it was brought to the attention of the General Manager, by 11 pissed off employees, he called the only 5 females that worked at the place into a meeting and after some intense grilling, the women finally admitted that they were purposefully sending more business to the woman than the men, because they wanted to make sure that a woman was the top salesperson. And not only that, but they had discussed, in secret, how they were going to go about doing it! And let’s make this clear, every single woman that worked at that outfit was in on this secret conspiracy. Gee… sounds an awful lot like that far-fetched notion of patriarchy that women keep accusing men of… except the patriarchy-boy’s club is the wrong gender, because what was really going on there was a matriarchal girl’s club, which designed itself to discriminate based on gender.

So, I maintain that women believe in so many of these far flung notions about men because women know that women themselves do these things and therefore they rationalize that if they were men, they would discriminate against women in the same way.

There is no secret patriarchy – but there is a secret matriarchy.

Now, of course, I just gave out one example, which by no means proves the existence of the secret girl’s club. But here’s a simple test you can do yourself which will strongly indicate that women, perhaps because of their herd mentality (as in, protect the herd first), do belong to a matriarchal conspiracy and are wilfully complicit in denying that such a thing exists. It just takes a little awareness, and a few separate conversations with the same woman.

First, what you have to do, is play on a woman’s most favourite subject: Her own victimhood. This is the only way to get women to turn on other women. Ask her a question about how nasty her female classmates in high school were capable of being and she will go into a tirade about how manipulative and bitchy girls can be – or ask her if she prefers to work with men or women. Women always tell you that they like working with men, because their female co-workers are constantly stabbing each other in the back and bring so much politics into the work place. This is about the only time that a woman will turn on the herd, when you start questioning her about how mean the the herd treats her. But make note of how easily you can get her to admit that she knows women can be mean, nasty, manipulative creatures – and file that away for future conversations.

Sometime, in the near future, you strike up another conversation with the same woman, and try to bring up a discussion of how a woman might possibly be aggressively manipulative against men by leveling false accusations of sexual harassment against a man, or how a wife might be psychologically abusive with manipulations against her husband… and watch the very same woman who recently told you how mean and nasty she knows women can be, suddenly clam up about how women might be doing some very mean things to men – if she doesn’t blow up in your face with righteous indignation for saying what she herself had recently admitted to, except applying it to men rather than her own victimization by bitchy women. She will automatically go into “protect the herd/Matriarchy mode” and deny everything about women’s sometime awful behaviour.

But now you know she knows, and you will no longer believe that she “doesn’t get it.” Rather, the only conclusion left is that she gets it – and she gets it well – but that protecting the Matriarchy is far more important to her than justice or honesty. One might even refer to such behaviour as amoral.

There is no Patriarchy, but women readily believe that it should exist somewhere, because it is a projection of what they know about being part of the “Girl’s Club – the Sisterhood!” And after decades of women (and men) searching for the Loch Ness Patriarchy, the only conclusion that the fembots can come up with to explain why they can’t expose it is because it is “institutionalized.” Yes indeed, the Patriarchy is civilization itself. Hmmm.

One can really see the lunacy of the whole “Patriarchy” argument when one looks at Social/Relational Aggression, which is stereotypically described as female aggression. Of course, one is hard pressed to find studies about this form of aggression in terms of female on male aggression, but it is ever present when one looks for women being victims, of other females. Then suddenly it is a serious issue, also known as girl bullying, which specifically uses forms of mental manipulations via secret gossiping, character assassinations and ostracizing, and mostly by convincing others to conspire against the victim along with the main aggressor.

http://www.aare.edu.au/01pap/bet01229.htm

Bullying Styles

“Bullying styles are generally considered to fall under two categories, direct and indirect. Direct physical bullying is to, hit, shove, kick, trip, push, and pull. Direct verbal bullying can involve name-calling, insults, threatening to hurt the other. Indirect bullying, also known as social or relational aggression (Crick 1997) involves attacking the relationships of people and hurting the self-esteem. It is subtler and involves behaviours such as spreading nasty rumors, withholding friendships, ignoring, gossiping, or excluding a child from a small group of friends.

There is no doubt that stereotypically, males are more physical and direct in their bullying styles and females more manipulative and indirect (Olweus, 1997; Bjorkqvist, 1994; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995; Lagerspetz, Bjorkqvist & Peltonen, 1988). Boys in our Western culture are encouraged to be tough and competitive and as they maturate slower and develop social intelligence at a slower rate they will use physical aggression longer than girls (Lagerspetz, Bjorkqvist, & Peltonen, 1988; Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, & Kauliaien, 1992). However there is no reason to believe that females should be less hostile and less prone to get into conflicts than males (Burbank, 1987, in Bjorkqvist 1994; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995). As females are physically weaker, they develop early in life other bullying styles in order to achieve their goals. Indirect aggression in girls increases drastically at about the age of eleven years (Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz and Kaukiainen, 1992) whereas physical aggression among boys decreases during late adolescence, to be replaced mainly by verbal, but also indirect aggression (Bjorkqvist 1994).

There is a growing body of research in gender differences of bullying and other adolescent aggressive behaviours. There are hundreds of studies dedicated to the topic, many placing the emphasis on boys or the forms of aggression, more salient to boys. Forms of aggression more salient to girls has received comparatively little attention (Crick, 1997; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995).”

Please note: Styles of aggression more salient to girls typically involve conspiring with others to hurt someone, kind of like, um, a cabal, a girl’s club, the Sisterhood… and notice how female styled aggression always revolves around plausible deniability. “Who me? I didn’t do anything!”
Is it a stretch to take this beyond childhood female on female bullying and say that women also aggress against men in the same manner?

“Patriarchy” is pure projection of what women know about “the Sisterhood.” They believe the Patriarchy exists because they know the Sisterhood exists.

So…

How far does this collective projection go? .

What about the feminist claims that because men make up the majority of politicians & judges, our legal system has been tainted to prefer men’s concerns over women’s. Yet of course, we all know this isn’t true. Male politicians have passed an obscene amount of laws pandering specifically to women’s concerns and there is no politician alive that has ever been elected to office by campaigning for issues specifically benefiting men. Yet, when one looks at the female politicians, it is easy to see that this false accusation against men is nothing more than projection of what females do when they get into office or powerful positions – the vast majority use their power to specifically benefit their own gender. The accusations that men are doing the same to women is so obviously false that it can be nothing but projection of what women know they would do if they had “men’s power.” And they have proved it by doing so.

How about the false accusation that men regard women as objects, as chattel, as a means of production? Hmmm… I don’t know, but women obviously regard men as a work animal which women useto provide for food, clothing, shelter and luxuries for herself and her children. And women believe that her husband’s labour is her property. This is why she sues her ex-husband for it after divorce. Who is treating who like a yoked farm animal, like chattel?

Hmmm… if women were running the world, there would be no more war? Well, since women got the vote around 90 years ago, the world has embarked on the most violent, most war filled century in the history of mankind – all during a time when women did/do run the world, because they hold 53% of the vote, and therefore they controlled those who started said wars and destruction.

Yup, even on the internet, we now hear things about how bad, bad men are “cyber-stalking” women and threatening violence and rape against feminists who blog man hatred on the web. Lol! Holy Projection, Batwoman! Is there one single anti-feminist on the internet who has not, over the past few years, been subjected to relentless threats of violence from cyberstalking feminists and mangina’s who believe that anyone speaking out in opposition of them is fully deserving of any and all vile threats that can possibly be conjured up? Please!

In almost every single accusation that feminists throw at men, one can find projection of their own horrible behaviour onto the behaviour of men. And they get away with it because women in general can readily identify with these kinds of behaviour. Projection!

This is not new. These ideas about women’s behaviour and moral character have been around for a long time. From the Bible to Aristotle, from Kant to Schopenhauer… and as “misogynistic” as feminists keep claiming that these people are, thus the reasoning for censoring the thousands of years of “Gender Studies” that existed before feminism, no-one has been better at proving correct these previous notions about male and female characteristics than the feminists who hate them the most, and the mainstream women who are complicit in letting them get away with it.

Man, this is some great soap!

2 comments