More MRA Reading: The War Against Patriarchy

When I first began this blog, I had been inspired by a number of MRA readings, and probably the most influential was Dr. Daniel Amneus' two books, The Garbage Generation and The Case For Father Custody.

At that time, I did a little more searching for other writings by Amneus, and found references to an article called "The War Against Patriarchy." However, whenever I tried to find it, any links or references I found for it never connected to the article itself.

After awhile, I forgot about it.

However, reading Rob Fedder's No Ma'am blog and his review of "The Case for Father Custody" the other day, I remembered that I never found that article, so I did another search for it today, and voila!

After reading it, I'm sure glad I found it! It offers the perfect synopsis of the main arguments he expounds upon in greater detail in The Garbage Generation and The Case For Father Custody. It can be read relatively quickly (compared to the two previously mentioned books -- it is a long article) and contains the main points, and is a great "introductory" reading to share with other people who are ignorant of what the MRA movement is all about.

I won't excerpt too much here...because if you haven't by now, you should definitely read the whole thing. Nevertheless, here's one cut that sums up the entire basis for Amneus' arguments:

The woman's primary contribution to the marriage is her willingness to share her reproductive life with a man and thereby enable him to have a family. The woman's willingness to make this offer and the man's willingness to make the complementary offer to love, honor, protect and provide for the resulting family are what make civilization and social stability possible. The condition of the ghettos shows what happens when the marriage contract becomes meaningless or irrelevant. The new law makes the woman's offer to share her reproductive life meaningless by declaring that she may renege on her offer at any time she chooses. It makes her a moral minor who cannot enter into a stable and enforceable contract upon which a man--and society--can depend. Granting the woman the right to renege on her contract makes the contract worthless and deprives the woman of most of her bargaining power in the marriage marketplace. It is hard to imagine anything more damaging to society--or to women.

Of course, those of us who are aware of the consequences like social chaos, generational poverty and increased crime and social pathology, correctly look at the state of affairs and realize that what Amneus writes is truth.

Then never forget that the feminists look at the casualties of the war against patriarchy -- the millions of divorces, broken homes, emotionally scarred children, alienated fathers, rampant promiscuousness, millions of aborted fetuses and a society coarsened and cheapened with rampant sexualization of our mothers, sisters and daughters -- and they call it "progress."

Nancy Levant's Rage Against the Machine

When I first began reading up in the MRA blogosphere, I came across the Cultural Devastation of American Women column from Nancy Levant, thanks to the in-depth book reviews Outcast Superstar did awhile ago.

Today, I finally got around to doing something I intended to do after having read her column and Outcast's reviews...I went to Nancy's archives at the News With Views site and checked out her past columns where I found some pretty intense and thought provoking columns!

I think it's safe to say Nancy is quite furious with feminism.

Not recklessly emotional, or out-of-control...but brimming with righteous indignation at feminists and what they have done to the modern American Female mindset. Witness her literary lashing as she seeks to disabuse feminists of the notion that the feminist movement is responsible for making women free...

From her column, The Dictatorship and Dialectic of Feminism

At the very top of my list of despicable leadership is the political feminist lobbying groups and organizations. Their use of dialectic manipulations of American women is diabolical. They polluted the very essence of liberation for women. For women to be liberated by feminism, they have to agree with all aspects and agendas of feminist doctrine and missions. If you disagree with them, you are believed to be flawed and damaged, ignorant, and enslaved.

Let me give the feminist political organizations a clue – American women ARE liberated, and we ARE liberated thanks to American men who recognized the value of liberated women in a sovereign REPUBLIC. For the feminist movement to claim that they freed American women is a lie. You were permitted to become feminists by virtue of righteous men. Let the men of this nation become too indignant or unrighteous, and see how long your self-proclaimed liberation lasts. Why don’t you ask the women of Afghanistan what happened to their liberation, which existed prior to the national radicalization of angry men with weapons?

I'll have to remember this choice nugget of wisdom the next time I read or hear another dimwitted, propaganda-addled feminist talk about how women are so oppressed in America by the so-called patriarchy...

Nancy continues her indictment:

American women are in dire straits. They have turned into cultural workhorses, both in homes and in the workplace, effectively performing 2 full-time jobs on a daily basis, and who are now forced to place their children into a daycare industry that damages the emotional security of their children. The feminist movement built the American daycare industry, which, in every state in the nation, is FULL OF MINIMUM WAGE FEMALE WORKERS, who perform the job of MOTHER to America’s children for MINIMUM WAGE.

Nancy would know, as the very basis for her point of view came from her own years spent as a daycare worker, raising the children of working mothers from all economic classes. It was this experience that gave her most of her material for her book, The Cultural Devestation of American Women.

Nancy than goes on to connect the dots and point to the underlying motive behind the modern day feminist movement

For decades, American women have been depressed, angry, unhappy, and exhausted due to the feminist demand that women leave the home to make money and to give up their children to social bureaucracies and corporations. Women are depressed, unhappy, and exhausted due to the mandates of the feminist movement, which first and foremost, is paid to forward population control - which in translation means the control over women, their bodies, and their choices. Feminism is simply another branch of dictatorship.

It's no accident that everywhere feminism has gained enormous cultural and legal influence, the birth rates have plummeted.

Nancy finishes up this excellent piece with a dire warning for modern American Women, and a plea to American Men...and it is a call that we in the West should definitely heed:

We have unalienable rights. All of the above are the weapons to destroy these rights – globally. And to American women, read, read, read The Cultural Devastation of American Women. We have been brutally wronged in this nation by insidious control mechanisms. If you don’t or can’t understand the enemy, you are doomed to exhaustion, anger and depression, to divorce, and to children who will never know who you really are as human beings. We have been bitterly and brutally deceived and used.

And to American men I say this – stand up and fight for your rights, for your states and nation, and for your families. This is your primary and single most important Constitutional duty as American men. Please, please save our freedom.

Tennessee Court's Common Sense Ruling

I think this sort of thing used to be a given in society...if a woman agreed to marry a man and accepted the engagement ring - than later broke it off, she returned the ring.

But my have the times changed...here's a story from The Tennessean:

Court: engagement rings must go back to giver

By SHEILA BURKE
Staff Writer

Don’t hock that engagement ring just yet.

If you don’t get married, you’re not entitled to keep the ring, the Tennessee Court of Appeals said Monday.

In a ruling that appears to be the first appellate decision of its kind in the state, the court said that if the wedding is canceled, the person who gave the engagement ring is entitled to get it back.

“In summary, we hold that an engagement ring is given in contemplation of marriage, and as such, is impliedly a conditional gift,” the unanimous opinion, written by Judge Charles D. Susano, said.

If the marriage doesn’t take place, “the engagement ring goes back to the one who gave it.”

The decision stems from a legal battle over an engagement ring that began in a Knox County court. The ruling involves a woman who is a reporter for WSMV in Nashville.

On Christmas Day 2005, Jason Crippen placed an engagement ring on Catharyn Campbell’s finger and proposed marriage.

After the couple broke up, Crippen asked for the ring back; Campbell would not give it to him.

I can't believe this guy actually had to go to court and pay through the nose to get his ex-fiance to return a ring when she no longer wanted to marry him.

Regardless, he should be glad they broke up now, instead of marrying this obvious gold digger...because she could have taken him for A LOT more than just a few grand for a diamond engagement ring.