- 2015-03-11 at 4:51 AM#29943+12
It’s hard to believe a MGTOW guy saying ridiculous and sensational stuff such as: “Women’s real plan, as taught in women’s studies class is gendercide. Not by killing men, just letting them die off and not replacing them. Having only women children.
But this is their stated goal. It’s just that no one wants to hear it so they go “la la la la la la” so they don’t have to hear the real plan that feminists are following to a T.
So, I’m doing an extensive quote from an interview with the person had the first idea that brainwashing 18 year old girls through intensive re-education courses could achieve the feminist final solution.
And all, your mother, your sister, your daughters, your co-workers, the woman walking down the street, they all know this is the plan, outwardly say it’s ridiculous but never admitting they know about it or that they support it…but they never deny it or protest against it. Especially the mothers of boys because mothers in feminist societies hate their son’s.
Am I being harsh? I am certainly not. Is the feminist here? Most certainly. I am simply quoting from an article by the actual article herself, the current modern third wave feminist architect of this “final solution”. Like talking to Osama Bin Laden about Al Quida and still denying the truth of what he’s saying. That’s how men have been in the last 100 years and probably for millenia before that.
Here is the rope feminist, why don’t we hoist you up your own petard. (That means let your own words hang you).
Sally Miller Gearhart, a feminist and a lesbian (but I repeat myself) who as a professor at San Francisco State University in the 1970s helped develop one of the first Women’s Studies programs in the nation. For quite some time, I’ve seen a quote from Professor Gearhart posted in various places around the Internet:
“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.”
This tne plus ultra expression of feminism’s genocidal hostility to men was sufficiently intriguing to me that I tracked down the source. Gearhart’s quote is from her essay, “The Future — If There Is One — Is Female,” which was included in the 1982 anthology Reweaving the Web of Life: Feminism and Nonviolence, edited by Pam McAllister.
Thanks to the generous support of readers — “Hit the Freaking Tip Jar!” — I obtained a copy of this book from Amazon. Here is an excerpt that provides the context of Gearhart’s infamous quote:
Enslaved by male-identification and years of practice within the system as we all still are to one degree or another, the assumption must be that the present system of monopoly capitalism and patriarchy must be replaced and that non-male-identified women must be the responsible ones. . . .
At least three further requirements supplement the strategies of environmentalists if we are to create and preserve a less violent world. I) Every culture must begin to affirm a female future. II) Species responsibility must be returned to women in every culture. III) The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race. . . .
To return species responsibility to women means in very practical terms that erotic and reproductive initiative must be restored to women all over the globe. . . . Make the decision entirely that of the woman as to how she will be impregnated and how often, if indeed she chooses to be so at all, and whether by heterosexual intercourse, artificial insemination or a form of ovular merging. Restore to each woman the inalienable right to say what shall become of any fertilized egg and to control absolutely the number of children she wishes to emerge from her body. . . . Make nonexistent any male’s say-so in the process of reproduction. Create and protect alternative structures of economic and psychological support for independent women — women not attached to men — who are child-bearers and child-raisers. . . .
Women will bear the number of children they know can be sustained not just by their own social group but by the wide ecological system. They will not bear the children that some man wants only to perpetuate his name or the family possession of his property; they will not bear the children they presently convince themselves they must have because their only role is obedient wife and mother; women will not have the children men think are necessary to perpetuate the tribe or the religion or the specific culture. Instead they will bear the children that they want, that they can care for, and that they assess are needed by the specific group and the entire species. . . .
In every culture it must be women in charge of the changes: women-identified women, no women who are pawns of men, not women who out of their fear of losing their lives or those of their children, still hold to the securities of that dangerous patriarchal culture, but women utterly free of coercion, free of male influence and committed to the principle that the right of species regulation is their own, and not the prerogative of any man. I suggest that lesbians and other independent women are already moving in this direction. . . .
To secure a world of female values and female freedom we must, I believe, add one more element to the structure of the future: the ratio of men to women must be radically reduced so that men approximate only ten percent of the total population. . . .
We now come to a critical point: how is such a reduction in the male population to take place? One option is of course male infanticide. It differs very little from the female infanticide that has apparently been carried out even into the twentieth century by some cultures. Such an alternative is clearly distasteful and would not constitute creative social change. . . .
f women are given the freedom of their bodies then they may well choose [experimental “ovular merging” technology that produces only female embryos] in great enough numbers to make a significant difference in the sex ratio of women to men. A 75% female to 25% male ratio could be achieved in one generation if one-half of a population reproduced heterosexually and one-half by ovular merging.
Such a prospect is attractive to women who feel that if they bear sons no amount of love and care and nonsexist training will save those sons from a culture where male violence is institutionalized and revered. These are women saying, “No more sons. We will not spend twenty years of our lives raising a potential rapist, a potential batterer, a potential Big Man.”day, think that women are fighting for control, supremacy, control of the children, and that’s true, but that is real goal.
But feminists say,”these are rad-fems, they don’t represent “real” feminists”, “most women aren’t feminists, feminists have gone too far” and then celebrate a 70% out of wedlock rate for the first group in the U.S. that any hitleresque eugenicist would target, in fact the very group Margaret Sanger herself wanted to target: The Black Community.
As a child in the 1970’s we knew the black family was being destroyed by government fiat through threats of defunding social programs, like housing for poor people, if a husband was present.
They got their 70% single motherhood and elimination of fathers and men from the black women. Now the hispanic and white women are not far behind and rising fast with a 40% single mother rate among whites.
Birthrates are at an all time low, the world wide quiet currently coordinated by Hitlary feminist revolution is working,and abortion’s are far more common than marriages.
Now World Emperor of the New Women’s Order, Hitlary Clinton, will be the first world wide Emporette to over 50% of the worlds population she has been courting ever since being made secretary of state. Do you know what I think Hitlary thinks…”wow, people question what I did as secretary of state? I say it in every appeareance but they don’t seem to understand…boy people are stupid, women can run the world”.
Because every time she speaks she openly states that she is the women’s and girls candidate, thus by exclusion not men and boys, and has been going around the world as secretary of state building a network of female leaders.
In a “lucky” move, feminists have now, just this year, wrested control of half the parliment seats and half of all board members in corps, in all the western countries. Without a popular vote, without debate and certainly without male debate.
Women have been meticulusly and carefully and openly brainwashed for 40 years. Two generations. So, women have no intention of a relationship. They want a sperm donor, will abort any males, and you will, in prepetuity due to the laws of the feminist state “create and protect alternative structures of economic and psychological support for independent women— women not attached to men — who are child-bearers and child-raisers.
They state it in writing for all the world to see yet the blind mangina’s hide their heads in the sand. Go your own way or not, it really doesn’t affect me, I’m all set up and doing great, you have to make your own decision.
But these are the facts. And these are the only way to explain the behavior of women and they’re government over the last 40 years. It’s all according to the plan laid out in the 1980’s. Their ahead of schedule, can you read?
Words and actions spell it out, it’s up to you what to believe.2015-03-11 at 5:10 AM#29952+6
Troll aler, troll alert: Please don’t feed the trolls.
See guys, if this wasn’t a thing why do they get so defensive about it? This troll posted within minutes of my writing this. That’s how closely our femin-nazi friends keep tabs on what the uppity ex-slaves are telling their manservants.2015-03-11 at 5:20 AM#29968+5
Well thank you very much and we are all honored about this aren’t we guys..? LMAO
(– our ability to smell the addiction of attention and drama from a thousands of miles away) 😉
Have a nice day, whatever makes you sleep well at night, cute princess! x
I'd rather die a natual death with a clear MGTOW conscience somewhere off the grid than one within "modern" civilisation with a big stress mark on my forehead and a couple of dozen tubes plugged into my body. Back to the plantation..? Me..? Hey, literally: I won't ever fucking kid myself...YZERLMNTSIC2015-03-11 at 5:24 AM#29969+7
Don’t believe we exist there cupcake. KNOW we exist. Also, please leave as you’re wasting all of our time.
Feminists who advocate mass androcide are one of my prime motivators for obvious reasons. I’d like to see exactly how they determined which 10% of men are to remain. Manginas would be a very poor choice IMHO.
@HRP: I’m sure they have a virtual army monitoring us, but I have no f~~~s to give about it. No screaming banshee feminist is going to stop me.2015-03-11 at 5:28 AM#29970+3
CPig, I would gladly push you to a lavish 600 but fell short by one anyway let’s play some music and do a tango shall we..?
I'd rather die a natual death with a clear MGTOW conscience somewhere off the grid than one within "modern" civilisation with a big stress mark on my forehead and a couple of dozen tubes plugged into my body. Back to the plantation..? Me..? Hey, literally: I won't ever fucking kid myself...YZERLMNTSIC2015-03-11 at 5:32 AM#29972+5
Enough of that honor cheers, lass. d°!°b
I'd rather die a natual death with a clear MGTOW conscience somewhere off the grid than one within "modern" civilisation with a big stress mark on my forehead and a couple of dozen tubes plugged into my body. Back to the plantation..? Me..? Hey, literally: I won't ever fucking kid myself...YZERLMNTSIC2015-03-11 at 5:35 AM#29973+4
@Ned: I’ve got it all fired up on this side of the pond. Hey man, she cursed at you so you must be doing something right. I’m giving you a plus back on everything today just for that.2015-03-11 at 5:37 AM#29974+3
Now I did it, yay..! (watch yer rep dude, all cool and the gang…) 😉2015-03-11 at 5:44 AM#29976+4
If you don’t wish to be treated as a child, then simply leave.2015-03-11 at 5:44 AM#29977+7
Too funny guys…she posted elsewhere she’s “sick of getting harassed by guys”… and she comes HERE? LMFAO Hopefully KM opens a BIG can of Bitch Away soon. That way she can get back to her more important roles of furthering infant genocide and taking care of butt ugly pugs.2015-03-11 at 5:50 AM#29978+4
Nah, I think she’s trying to ruin the post by having us take it down due to it consisting of one line jokes by a very unimaginative troll.
And it’s working.2015-03-11 at 5:50 AM#29979+3
Cameltoe.2015-03-11 at 5:51 AM#29981+2
“sick of getting harassed by guys”
Seriously now???? She ignores multiple in your face notices that this is for men only and complains about not being welcomed with open arms.
You’re right HRP. I’m done. At least you tried. Hopefully, KM can just delete everything below your first entry as people need to know this information.2015-03-11 at 5:57 AM#29984+3
“All I’m looking for is to be treated like an equal” Well then congratz, you already are, dear wyminz. And it’s actually pretty easy for anyone with 3 working brain cells to notice that women actually have it better on average. So why are you still here? Go out and enjoy having a vagina !
It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.2015-03-11 at 5:58 AM#29986+3
@Cameltoe: I bet none of those things actually happened to you.2015-03-11 at 6:08 AM#29991+4
I was talking about the guys who shout comments at me while I’m walking and who pull up next to me in cars and who whistle and openly talk about wanting to rape me while I’m minding my own business
You came to the the exact wrong place to look for such manginas. Now would somebody please volunteer to gently guide her to right here: /womens-shelter/ …?2015-03-11 at 6:15 AM#29993+1
Lawl, dem wimynz b funneh. If they get “street harassed” they complain about the unwanted attention, while the less attractive ones complain about people not giving them attention”nobody loves me boohoo”. And if you feel unsafe in the streets, just a friendly reminder: men are the the majority of victims of violent crimes, such as assault/stabbing etc… Just cut the paranoid crap your femibuddies made you swallow and go enjoy life !
It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.2015-03-11 at 6:17 AM#29994+5
To our newer members: what we have here is a clearly marked male only space whose creation was inspired by some enormously disrespectful behavior in women. The creators and users of this site have abandoned women for exactly this behavior. We have not attacked them for this behavior, or engaged them in exchanges in an attempt to make them recognize, acknowledge or change it for being as disrespectful as it is. We just abandoned them and created a space without them.
What we have here today is a woman who’s freely chosen to disrespect that simple, clearly marked rule, show up here anyway and post disrespectful comments in an attempt to get male attention. The attention she has so far been successful at getting (even though it’s negative attention) is now no longer focused on the issues that men came to this site to focus on. As the site becomes more popular and more useful to more men, it becomes a more and more attractive target for women who lack this basic respect. To the extent that they are rewarded with your attention, they can be expected to return.
Look, it's not my fault that tornado dropped a house on your sister. Now get back on your broom and get your ass out of here... and take your monkeys with you2015-03-11 at 6:38 AM#30001+1
I do these posts because I always learn something new.
In this piece I learned that my idea of “independent” women as women that are financially independent was completely wrong. That all that nonsensical stuff that is said in articles about “strong independent women” meant man haters. Now it all makes sense.
As it turns out, from our friendly feminist author, “independent” woman means a woman that isn’t under the control of a man. He may work like a dog his whole life long to provide her with a lifestyle she “deserves”. But if he tries to make a decision then she is no longer “independent”.
So, to feminists, being dependent on the government makes you the most independent type of woman there is. I certainly didn’t know that.
Thanks feminism for clarifying that. I get it now, now I know what “we are strong independent women” really means.
It means a woman that likes to tell her closest friend and lover, her husband, to f~~~ off.
Now I want to marry a strong independent woman. /s2015-03-11 at 6:46 AM#30006+3
I’m actually more of a dog person thanks
Being a bitch doesn’t classify you as an animal-loving person. We would appreciate if you’d find your way, back into the kitchen.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.