Search AH Abuse Industry BBC Cannabis Child Custody Child Support Copyright Discrimination D Violence Education Equality False Allega- Feminism Home Office NSPCC Paternity Fraud Paternity Tests Rape Sex Sex Trafficking Sex Harass Smacking War on Drugs Homer, The Iliad ...



It is entirely seemly for a young man killed in battle to lie mangled by the bronze spear. In his death, all things appear fair.



Ah yes. Those were the days when women had it bad. The Nature Nature Scam



A recent report published by feminist 'scientists' claims that women do not do well in Maths and Science because they are discriminated against and because society does not provide an environment that is conducive to women flourishing in such areas. And it is argued that women would be just as good as men in Maths and Science if more help was provided to women.



And this, of course, is true.



If we bias the educational system so that it heavily favours girls rather than boys (as is currently the case) and if we also do everything in our power to discriminate against young men and put them off the whole idea of doing Maths and Science (which we are also doing) while doing the very opposite for young women then, indeed, women might one day end up being as good as men in Maths and Science.



After all, the environment is important.



But the truth is this.



Given the same opportunities, the same levels of assistance and the same amount of encouragement, men will always be far more capable than women in Maths and Science and, indeed, in nearly all other areas of intellectual endeavour.



And the evidence suggests that the only way in which women will ever reach parity with men in the intellectual sphere is if the levels of discrimination against men reach truly gargantuan proportions - which they might well do judging by current trends.



Also see Men are More Intelligent than Women? and Well Done the Girls? Polygamy ...



The presence of polygamy in a society is often seen as a mark of female oppression.



If anything, however, it is an indication that some men are wealthy enough to afford many wives, while the other men are either too poor or too dead to get married; with the number of these latter men indicating with reasonable accuracy the number of excess wives maintained by the former! Men's Rights

Selected Emails If you wish to email Angry Harry, see here. And, if appropriate, also see, ... Email Advice - Especially For Young Women how to manipulate men Hi Harry,



I just read with interest your article regarding search terms such as Women Manipulate Men".



I found it interesting that specific Google searches for the terms

"How to manipulate men" and "How to manipulate women" revealed very different figures in terms of the number of search results.



"how to manipulate men" had 239,000 results. "how to manipulate women" had 31,900 results.



I think I now know what the majority of women use the internet for...lol David Hello David Yes, I've just confirmed your finding. LOL Harry How could women, who were saved from the horrors of life, consider themselves oppressed Dear Harry, I just wanted to give a words of thanks. As a young Canadian girl who just got an interest in history, I have found that every textbook and teacher just seems to spew the same stuff: women had no choices, women had no rights, etc. For a while, I believed it, until I met my Grade 11 teacher. She was a feminist, and, along with a student teacher fresh from the University of Toronto (with degrees in Women's Studies and what not), taught us that women were opressed. I, of course, believed it. But then I noticed that during research for an essay I did, I found that there was no mention of men, or that women were the perpetrators. Now, thanks to you and Manwomanmyth, my thoughts have changed. Whenever I look at the textbooks now and see pages and pages of men dying horrificly, I am appalled and saddened. But whenever I see a small article on how women didn't get a Renaissance or that they were denied full citizenship, I am skeptical. To the mere mention of that I was completely flabbergasted. How could women, who were saved from the horrors of life, consider themselves oppressed, compared to what men had to face? It's ridiculous. Unfortunately most people I know don't even consider this. Feminism is like a plague and it is permanently affecting the minds of those around them. It, along with many other pseudo sciences and scientists, vomits out these ridiculous facts and theories that it is preposterous to even consider that they really happened. It is a shame that women have become such vile beings and that most men have fallen hook, line and sinker for this hateful ideology. I miss the men that would respect women and kiss your hand, or stand up when you entered the room. I think all our forefathers are rolling in their graves. Whenever I look at my history textbooks I have to scoff. I always think and consider that women just are different than men; they just didn't want to change things because it'd be too much work. I find it a huge shame how academia and such has become dishounoured by feminism. I fear entering university for the fear of being indoctrinated. This is probably a long message, but either way, I just wanted to give a special thank you. Your articles are a new kind of Enlightenment. If I could reach through the screen and hug you, I would. Always keep up with your amazing work. L Interview by World Net Daily ... Harry, Here are the questions. ====================== Is it safe to say you wish to be identified only as "Angry Harry," and that you shield your name and personal information online? (This is relevant to how I present your quotes, if I use them, in the article. Please be assured that this is not a 'hit piece," ... There is nothing strange about using a screen name on the internet. ... nor am I looking to attack the Men's Rights Movement.) It would certainly be an unwise thing to do. Can you give me any personal data – age, what you do, whether you're married or were married, etc. Age 59. Psychologist. Would you say that there's a common demographic in the Men's Rights Movement? No. MRAs come in all shapes and guises. Left-wing. Right-wing. Black, White. Muslims. Christians. Jews. Atheists. Doctors. Lawyers. Police Officers. Teachers. Academics. Europeans. Americans. Asians. All ages. There is no demographic that is common. Do members run the gamut of all ages and marital statuses, or is there a pattern? No pattern that I can discern. How did you become a "men's rights activist?" See, The Angry Antifeminist What are the origins of the Mens Rights Movement? No idea. Would you say you are one of the key figures in the MRM? No idea. And couldn't care one way or the other. Can you name others? Try Google. :-) Is your movement political? Of course it is. What are your personal politics, if any, and how do the affect your activist as an MRA? I am a conservative libertarian - a Ron Paul fan. I also believe that honesty is a hugely important virtue - sadly missing in so many people today - especially in government. What are some of the key issues central to the Men's Rights Movement? False allegations. Child access. Child custody. Alimony. Child Support. Education. Fathers' rights. Governmental interference, corruption, incompetence. What's it all about? Men's rights. What do you hope to achieve through your activism? More rights for men. What is the end goal of the MRM, if any? More rights for men. How do you respond to allegations that the MRM is simply based around hatred for women, or that MRAs are bitter, lonely men lashing out at women because they can't find partners? I don't respond to such allegations. Have you stopped beating your wife? Besides which, I think that you'll find that it is feminists who hate women - which is why they keep insisting that women behave and think like men. I notice you have "register-her.com" linked on your website. The purpose of the website seems clear enough, but aren't you afraid about being sued for linking people on the site who've been convicted of no crime? As I understand it, the purpose of register-her is to highlight the fact that it is not only men who sometimes behave badly. Is it true that register-her.com has contact and even travel route information for the individuals listed? No idea. How is this anything but an implied invitation to violence? Then I presume that any newspaper reporting on a criminal can be accused of the same. Is there anything we haven't touched on that you'd like to point out? 1. The MRM is going to be a much bigger force than you can probably imagine. A force much bigger than that which emanates from all the political parties from right around the world put together. 2. If World Net Daily was serious about reducing the size, power and cost of government then, in my view, Joseph Farah - who is a first class activist - should spend more time attacking feminism; e.g. see, ... Male Bloggers - Failing Miserably To Understand The Issues Anything you'd like to emphasize? Feminism is heading for oblivion - where it belongs. It is nothing more than a hate movement propped up by numerous self-serving groups that profit from all the hatred towards men that it purposely engenders. Thank you in advance. I'm interviewing Paul Elam by phone shortly, and hope to get a couple of other interviews from folks inside the movement. If you want to suggest anyone, please do. Best, Phil ........ NOTE TO READERS: I didn't like the tone or the implication of some of the questions; hence my cold responses. not a great fan but ... Hi Harry I'm not a great fan of your site tho I wander over to peruse it on occasion. I appreciate your efforts but am not very convinced about your approach. There is a question I want to ask and I do genuinely not intend to come across as insulting. Paul Elam has a banner on his site describing you as the "Father of the Men's Movement". Any comments? G Hi G LOL! Yes. Paul is up to his usual chicanery and is doing his best to drum up support for the MRM. I love that man. He'll do almost anything to further the cause. Most MRAs now distinguish between the Men's Rights Movement (MRM) and the Men's Movement (MM) - the latter broadly being a 'consciousness' of men's issues and a recognition of the fact that men are being treated like dirt. And probably always have been treated in such a manner. And Paul is just appreciating the fact that Yours Truly has been trying to grow this consciousness via the internet for well over a decade now. And, of course, he is trying to help my website numbers to grow. And by giving me this lofty status, he is attempting to rouse people's curiosity. Good tactic! The man's a genius. But, of course, Paul knows full well that MRAs of various sorts have been around for over 100 years (e.g. Belfort Bax) and even I know MRAs in the UK who have been active far longer than me. But I think that it is fair to say that Yours Truly has managed, via the internet, to alert thousands of men to the injustices that they are facing, and I have put a huge amount of effort into doing this. Nevertheless, I suspect that Paul is 'rewarding' me for my effort rather than for my success. LOL! But, to repeat myself, it is a very clever tactic. Furthermore, if I might be so bold, it is also the case, in my view, that this website is enormously powerful; in the sense that the text contained within it is extremely destructive to the anti-male agenda. Indeed, this website is all about 'power' - even the supposedly humorous pieces, for the most part. Put this website properly inside your head, and my guess is that you will no longer fear what feminists and their associated victim groups might do to you any more. In fact, I can **assure** you that current-day feminists who know about this website are very fearful of it - because it undermines just about everything that they have ever said and done. And it also exposes them and their supporters as being thoroughly obnoxious bigots and liars or, at best, as useful idiots. Even more alarming for them, however, is that in combination with the activities of other MRAs - such as the great Paul Elam himself - this website has the potential to wake up **millions** of men. And these men are not going to be too pleased when they finally realise how the feminists and their lackeys have been cheating and deceiving them. In other words, feminists and their supporters are heading for serious trouble. And by hoisting me up in the eyes of the public, Paul is simply trying one tactic to help him ensure that they get it. Well, that's my guess. Who knows what he's really up to? But he's definitely up to something! Best Harry Women are worst for snitching Hi Harry I dont know whether it is me but I find that i am not allowed to assert myself and stand up to women colleagues in the workplace when I know they are wrong or whether they have behaved rudely to me. I work via agencies on temping posts and I find that if i do the above, a phone call comes through from the agency and i am told to go home and not come back. Most of the time , agencies have other work lined up for me so my being let go of because of an altercation with female colleagues is not as detrimental as would be the case if work was more scarce. Women are worst for snitching and are expert at putting you on the backfoot over very minor mistakes. Is there any reason why women are favoured by employers in this way? regards Nigel Hello Nigel Women nowadays get jobs and/or get promoted and/or avoid censure because employers are terrified of the possible consequences. I have even seen military top brass bemoan the fact that they dare not complain about the sub-standard performance of women because they are likely to end up in court.. Same goes for the Uk's National Health Service - where some 50% of women doctors give up on their careers, thereby leaving hospitals and surgeries short-staffed. No-one is allowed to mention this. e.g. see, ... Is the Training of Women Doctors A Waste of Money? Even more insidious is the fact that there is a branch of government that can insist on a whole deluge of hugely invasive investigations should it decide that a company might be discriminating against women in some way. If they have such a suspicion, the company can be in for a mountain of aggravation and costs. So companies make sure that they do nothing that even appears as if men are, somehow, getting a better deal. And, for example, this sometimes means paying women more; just so that they can play safe. You would not believe the extent to which this malicious feminist ideology has a stranglehold over companies and over government itself. A few weeks ago, a UK police officer wrote in the Telegraph that his police bosses would prioritise a trivial domestic violence incident over a serious knife stabbing in the street in order to keep getting the brownie points from their politically-corrected masters. It's that bad. Men are being hammered everywhere. And this will NEVER stop, because these feminist 'empires' need to keep justifying their existence by FOREVER portraying men as devils who are always cheating women. It does not matter how much men accommodate to the feminist agenda. these feminists and their allies in the abuse industry (lawyers, therapists, domestic violence and rape groups, child abuse organisations etc etc) MUST continue their onslaught against men in order to CONTINUE justifying their funding, their jobs, pensions etc etc. The same is true for many government departments and professional groups. For example, divorce alone in the UK is a multi-billion pound windfall for the legal profession, the social services and the 'therapy' business. These huge 'industries' will, therefore, drum up as much pressure as possible to maintain a high divorce rate: i.e. they will hype up the domestic violence statistics, the levels of child abuse etc etc e.g. see, ... Fathers Groups Miss The Big Picture Thus, it comes as no surprise to see that, in America, the profession that contributes the most to the Democratic Party is the legal profession. The legal profession makes a fortune out of all the legal disputes and the social disharmony that the Democrats promote. Harry I am one of those that has completely changed my thoughts about women's rights and feminism. ... Dear Angry Harry:



I wish to acknowledge that you are correct. I am one of those that has completely changed my thoughts about women's rights and feminism. All this came about after the Catherine Kieu Becker case [she cut off her partner's penis] and the initial responses to it by women. Turning her into the victim and him into the criminal for doing something to deserve it. The real turning point came after viewing The Talk's segment about that crime. I was angry, repulsed, and regretted ever supporting women's causes. [The women on the panel on The Talk (an American TV program) in August 2011 were, essentially, laughing and jeering at a man whose penis had been cut off by his partner. The female audience were laughing too.] No I don't wish any harm come to women. I will not stoop to the likes of the hosts and audience of The Talk, but I did feel like I was sucker punched. After being supportive of women's causes and "equality" for many years, I never saw the way that their goals had changed. I noticed how silent the feminists' groups were after this crime and that spoke volumes to me. I watched your you tube videos and others' as well and have been enlightened tremendously. Thank you.



I contacted CBS and the executives [about The Talk] several times to no avail. I wrote sponsors of the show, to no avail. I posted on various pages and YouTube pages urging others write and call in. Why can't we as men get organized better, especially after this incident and all the anger that it caused? Women's groups would have had picket lines outside CBS. They would have had tons of people writing to sponsors so that they'd listen to the clout the group has. I am very frustrated that nothing was done. That the response was so paltry compared to what women would have accomplished. Is there any hope? ... I also have been noticing recently the number of criminal cases which involved people of both genders where the woman gets probation and the men get charged with felonies for the same crime! What's that about? Why no outcry? I know I am preaching to the choir. I just wanted to know what can we do better? How can we become more organized and more powerful, especially with all the social media sites out there? Help.



Thanks for listening and letting me vent.



Sincerely,



Howard Hello Howard, I have spent many years - together with other MRAs - wondering how on earth men can be motivated to stand up for their rights. And you can forget any grandiose ideas that you occasionally read on various men's forums regarding what needs to be done. There is only ONE thing that we need. Continued publicity. And some of the reasons why it has been so hard to get the Men's Movement going are mentioned in my piece, ... No Men's Groups But you can cheer yourself up with the comforting thought that our 'enemies' - of which there are many - are genuinely very worried about our activism, and, further, that we are increasingly being supported from the 'inside' by some very important groups of people; most significantly, police officers, soldiers and, believe it or not, some judges. Finally, I can assure you that there will come a point when the authorities, various media organisations and certain academic institutions won't know what hit them. When this happens, it's all over for the feminists and their allied hate groups. So, please keep giving us publicity. This is what we need. Indeed, you can even give us publicity without endorsing our stance. For example, "There is this stupid fellow called Angry Harry (LINK) who says that ....". Best wishes, Harry .............. For newcomers, I strongly recommend my piece ... Why Governments Love Feminism You will surely then see far more clearly just how it is that the demonisation and disadvantaging of men and boys is worth many billions of dollars to many people and groups in positions of power. More importantly, perhaps, many of you will actually be empowered hugely in your own lives by understanding better what is really going on 'out there'. ... How can anyone claim that women are oppressed when they have so many more choices and freedoms than men Dear Angry Harry, I often read your website, and I often find myself infuriated as I read it. Not because of you, of course (you're doing a wonderful thing), but because of the blatant oppression and hatred of men that you consistently expose. Why is nothing done about it? How can the judicial system - the system that is supposed to protect the people - be so blatantly misandrist and get away with it? How can the common man allow this to happen? I was prompted to send this email after one of the latest links you posted; about a woman who stole her ex-husband's sperm by forging his signature (of course the misandrist courts considered this "simulating his signature"!) and was able to claim £100,000 off him even though he didn't even have sex with her to conceive the child - he had NO say, no choice, in the matter! It's absolutely insane! How can this be allowed to happen? Men's rights and choices are constantly being diminished and undermined, while women acquire more rights, privileges, and choices all the time. How can anyone claim that women are oppressed when they have so many more choices and freedoms than men - the freedom to choose whether they have a child or not without the man's consent (you'd never hear anyone tell a woman she can't have an abortion because she "needs to accept her responsibilities", or that she must have an abortion because she stole some poor sod's sperm) being a particularly obvious one. I recently read [yet another] article about "girls outshining boys" in education, and it just makes my blood boil. I recently enrolled at college, and the introductory booklet I was given had half a page listing the charities available to provide financial support exclusively for girls/women (I'd say at least 10, and it said to search for more online), but absolutely none aimed at exclusively helping boys/men (there were two or three aimed at all students). This is so confusing to me, if girls are consistently achieving higher grades than boys, WHY are they consistently given more and more support while boys continue to fell behind? The article gave a few "reasons" for boys falling behind (obviously there was no mention of misandry and oppression, and the forced removal of fathers and male teachers), but if they have "reasons" where are their solutions? I hear nothing about them making any efforts to rectify the situation! This has been a problem for some time, and nothing has been done about - those who are supposed to protect and serve the people are failing them repeatedly. Sometimes I feel like a revolution is the only option, to overthrow the useless, misandrist, and undemocratic government and legal system we are currently stuck with. To establish a new government that embraces the true values of democracy, liberty, and equal rights for all - regardless of whether they're men, women, or mothers (who always seem to get even more leniency than that normally granted to women who aren't mothers) - and does a better job running a country without driving it towards mass unemployment and ridiculous debts. This country used to be great, but despite incredible advances in science, technology, and medicine, the quality of our society has diminished at an alarming rate. I've emailed you because I feel isolated; there's no one I can talk to about this and I just want to get it all out. I try to bring it up with my friends and they dismiss everything in a way that is rather typical of those who have been indoctrinated ("you're just being silly, feminists are the embodiment of everything that is good and fair!" or simply, and commonly, "you're a misogynist!"). I don't expect you to answer my questions, I just needed to rant. I know you know all this stuff already (I learnt most of it from your website, after all) and I know that the only answers to any of these questions are simply irrational feminist hatred, political corruption, and greed. I thank you and other MRAs for your efforts in exposing and correcting the despicable levels of hatred we have to put up with every day in every area of our lives. I only hope I can do more to help rectify our dire situation soon. Thank you, J ... the process of indoctrinating women as a voting block has resulted in an entrenched bureaucracy in the U.S., staffed with incompetents Dear Harry, Your website has piqued my interest. I haven't seen many like it, and I agree with much that is described in the articles. I think the general course of feminism has turned downward, as women (finally..) perceive the reasons why their gender has garnered so much publicity. Much of the feminist movement was centered around politics. Female politicians would not be voted into office unless they had their partners-in-gender registered as voters, and eager to vote for the advancement of women. Since the sixties, the process of indoctrinating women as a voting block has resulted in an entrenched bureaucracy in the U.S., staffed with incompetents of every liberal stripe, and female congress members who cannot be removed from their pillars of power. The effort also resulted in an industry of tort, which has been lucrative for both females and their attorneys. I believe the overriding reason for feminism was to grow the government. Liberals do have that agenda as a key component of their building a power base: Big Brother is as crucial to the survival of liberals in politics as quota hiring and set-asides for females is for their assured employment. California, my home state, is now a bastion of liberal politics, with nary a sign that our current cabal will be wrested from their thrones. The state is flat broke, our citizens are plagued with crime, high costs of living, corruption on a grand scale, business departures due to high operating costs, illegal aliens taking what few jobs remain for those displaced by our economic debacle, and women who STILL believe that they have changed our world for the better. Naivete seems to be their one remaining, endearing female trait. Sincerely, Sincerely, D I too was taken in by the hysterical, misandristic feminist rhetoric of the late sixties Dear Angry Harry This could be a long and rambling message which you may wish to discard unread as you'll have received many like this and read it all before. I was prompted to write in response to the posts I've read at your web site. I think it's true that I cannot disagree with anything you've written, or said in any of the video interviews at YouTube, and I have been saying exactly the same things for more than twenty years, probably to my cost. All that's changed over that time, in my understanding of the interaction of the sexes, is that my experiences have confirmed my early suspicions and developed my ideas. I'm a 55 year old Englishman and like many of my age I too was taken in by the hysterical, misandristic feminist rhetoric of the late sixties and early seventies, partly due, I'm certain, to the weight of traditional cultural programming that is epitomised in the word 'chivalry'; women as the 'weaker' sex, women as disadvantaged in employment and pay etc. etc. etc. I think I probably became aware that the truth might be at odds, and sometimes markedly so, with what I felt I was being coerced into accepting and saying I believed sometime in the early eighties, certainly before 1982 and I have no doubt that the advance of feminist thinking is almost entirely due to misplaced notions of chivalry in the minds of men. What else could possibly inhibit us from telling them to sit down and shut up? The years 1980 - 82 were seminal in terms of the development of my thinking. I worked at that time in the art studio of a small magazine publisher and was exposed to some very left-wing people, some of whom were 'feminists'. What struck me was how ugly they were, and I'm not describing any lack of physical beauty. They were all unattractive and unpleasant personalities and they seemed to take it for granted that those they met in that environment shared their views. To a one they were all verbally aggressive when I disagreed with them. Dissent always provoked an accusation that I and any other opponents were some sort of 'ist', usually a fascist, a sexist or a racist. The men could be verbally vicious but always fell back when I defended my position calmly, without becoming flustered or feeling intimidated. The women were very different; there was a citric acidity to their attacks, and they didn't back down unless challenged, in effect, to a verbal dual one showed one had every chance of winning. One young woman in particular sticks in my memory: she was given to wearing extremely short, loose, floaty floral dresses, bare-legged (unusual then) with Dr Martin's shoes and no socks. It was as though she were setting a trap with herself as the bait and the shoes as an unpleasant surprise for anyone silly enough to make advances. 'I'm soft and feminine (she wasn't) but I will kick', she seemed to be saying by her manner and dress. I married my first wife at that time. She was all that is vile in a woman and I cannot understand why I shackled myself to her. I think it was simply that traditional cultural programming again: doing the right thing, seeing a job through, keeping one's word etc. I had no need to marry her (she was not pregnant) and certainly felt that I was making a mistake but I felt that it would have been dishonourable to back out. I would have saved myself a great deal of trouble had I done so. She was in every sense a toxic female and with a vicious, criminal nature. She was adept at fomenting a quarrel and then eliciting the sympathy and support of those who knew us, even my own parents. She was a spiteful and devious bitch who stole from me and left me, for the fourth dramatic time, when I made it very clear that the jig was finally up. I lost everything, due in part to her deceit and dishonesty, but had the satisfaction of seeing her get absolutely nothing from me that she had not already stolen and secreted away, unknown to me at the time. I have never recovered economically from the losses I sustained through marriage to her. The last I heard she was living in her fourth house since leaving me, all bought jointly with men she lured into abusive relationships then kicked out, except the first; that was bought with money she stole from me. My present wife is vastly different, and I am an extremely lucky man, but she possesses many of the faults of her sex; she is distracted by childish, glittery things, her taste in food is for the comforts of her childhood and she dislikes almost all adult foods, including fish that isn't battered or mashed and breadcrumbed or mixed or covered with potato etc, shellfish, chicken on the bone etc etc etc. She happily admits that the wrapping of a present, with ribbons, bows, sparkles and in a glittery little carrier bag of the sort sold for a fiver in shops selling glittery and childish tat, is more important to her than the present itself. She is the breadwinner, and has been for most of our time together (I have no income at present - there is no niche for me in our feminised economy) yet she does not behave in the way most men do as breadwinners; she cannot put my priorities before her own, so we end up with two, three or four, or more of almost everything, with cutlery and crockery and other things we will never use but her car had to be sold because the money that would have got it through the MOT was frittered away on trivia, the garden remains unfinished and essential storage for unimportant things like printer paper, stationery, pens etc, and my photographic equipment, our tools (they're for the house and so on so not just mine) and so on remains on the wish list. The rented house we live in is totally inadequate and I'm to blame because I left the choice up to her - that's her argument. I can see why she chose it: It has a faux cottagey look and the kitchen is fitted with units of a distinctly doll's house furniture appearance. The all too obviously printed tile pattern of the cushion flooring was good enough to deceive her into believing it was a quarry tiled floor. She thought the place enchanting, and still does. I could go on and on but I'll end here. Every thing you have written about women is borne out by my experiences of them and I know that a society controlled by women cannot possibly exist. My opinions developed long before the MRM found a voice on the internet and I'm sure that's true of many others. Thankfully the WWW, another male development, allows us to exchange ideas and move towards sanity. Thanks for taking the trouble to read this far. Yours etc. William men are naturally superior Hi Sir: My name is A and I'm a 24 year old girl from California. I wanted to send you an email to show my support, especially on your views on the inability for women like me to be equal. My belief is that it is impossible for me to be equal because men are naturally superior. All men are better than me and I am second to all men. I think feminism is a total lie because I respect and embrace the superiority of men. I am here to serve men and be used by them as they see fit. Unlike many people who seem to hold these views, I did not come to them because of any religious belief (I am not religious) or by any kind of belief in the modesty of women. I consider myself a slut, I like to sleep around and dress in revealing clothes. I do not like relationships and at the moment I am not interested in marriage or having kids. This does not preclude me from understanding my place as a girl though. This is how I have always thought of myself and I have been lucky enough to know some men that have reinforced my beliefs. I am not here to give men problems, I am not here to make demands of them, I am not here to take advantage of them. That is not my role. It is an honor to be able to email a man like you who understands what I mean. All men are great men by their very nature, but you are a very great man. Thank you, and I hope to hear back from you. A I believe that Feminism has given Cluster B women yet more pathological power Dear Harry: I have recently found your site, and I rather like it. I admire your style and sense of humor. I don't see you using the verbal violence, bullying tactics, and/or vulgar and demeaning language that some of the other men in the MRM use or Feminists who attack your work in this infantile way. Instead, a lot of your observations are very astute, original and your arguments clearly come from a balanced and educated mind which make them stand out all the more and is wise of you to do. No where can I conclude that you hate women as you are accused of. I clearly see Feminism is validly under attack with you and not all women. I myself have no use for Feminism. Whatever good it did do is long over, and the damage it has caused to Men, Women, Children, Family and Society has overshadowed it. As a matter of fact, I don't even know what they are still trying to get at. I wonder if they clearly know themselves or if they are just a bunch of punch drunk women swinging madly for no reason as it seems to be the case. I believe that Feminism has given Cluster B women yet more pathological power and that has been one of it's biggest downfalls. Their word is now taken face value as true because they are master's of spinning Feminism for their own gain. As if a Cluster B woman would care about another woman's plight anyway and join a group to fight for them. I like as well that you do not fall under the spell of treating the Cluster B's with velvet gloves, excuse or justify their behavior or worse yet drum up sympathy and compassion for them. I find that you are among the few Psychologists or Mental Health Professionals who doesn't do the above. I admire your strengths and ability to stand up for what is right on both fronts by speaking out about it, and I don't believe that your endeavors are easy pursuits either. Thank you for doing so. Debby an amazing website ... Dear Harry Firstly, can i just ask you not to post my name up on your site (well, you're not likely to post this its just a thanks) - and I'm not going to insult you either!! Wouldn't dream of it.



Thank you for such an amazing site, i have no idea how i will find the time to read it all, but I have read a few already, and i do find it massively depressing. Mainly because as a woman, I don't want to feel useless and obsolete - well, who does right? But i am hugely aware of the misandry in the world, particularly here in the UK which is totally looked over by seemingly everyone. Laughing at jokes about men which if the joke was on women - it would be an unholy uproar.



I hate double standards.



Anyway, I would like to say that although I have called myself a feminist in the past, I do'nt think i was naming myself right!! and I didnt ever want to be associated with the hideous witches who are f*cking up family here in the west. I just wanted to say i appreciate your work on your sites and i will continue to read and educate myself, and i will do my best to counter the insanity that surrounds me. If i ever hear women bashing men I just hold them to task on it and they are usually left with their mouths flapping as they don't even think how it could be sexist or revolting behaviour.



More power to you



Ems 'interview' for newspaper article ... Dear Harry,



I stumbled across your website when researching for an article I have

been commissioned to write for a Sunday newspaper. The piece is a

result of the Richard Keys and Andy Gray scandal (two very renowned and respected British Sports Broadcasters being fired from their £1.7 million a year jobs as a result of joking that a female linesman didn't know the offside rule). My article is investigating the 'Because we're worth it' generation of women, who don't want equality, but superiority over men. I was wondering whether I could ask you a few questions regarding

women being sexist and how you thought this was impacting society?



Thank you so much.



Francesca ..... >Firstly, what inspired you to set up your website? A growing awareness that we were being lied to a great deal by various powerful left-wing politically-corrected groups who were, essentially, seeking to profit themselves by stirring up hatred towards men and boys. The increasing onslaught against them in the family and in the traditional educational system was one of the most obvious manifestations of this. >There seem to be a lot of angry men out there.... Do you think this is a recent revolution, or in your opinion has this feeling of resentment towards women been a long time coming? Recent; for the most part. >Do you feel the support for men in society is growing? Absolutely. >What do you see the relationship between the genders like in 5 years time? Not much different from today. >Do you believe men will have regained their position of authority in society? What position of authority in society? Women have always been hugely powerful throughout society as far as I am aware.



Far more powerful than men, in my view. (Apart, perhaps, from those very few men at the top.) >What do you believe is the appropriate role for men and women in society/family/economy? I am not worried about what roles men and women choose to have in society. Women can do as they please as far as I am concerned.



I hate feminism because it is a thoroughly nasty ideology promoted from the top by some very devious and wicked people who are persistently seeking to stir up trouble within their own societies so that they can enrich and empower themselves; e.g. see, ... Why Governments Love Feminism Best,



AH conned by a 14 year-old girl ...



Hello Harry,



Just wanted to say a big "Thank You" for your site, and all the hard work you obviously put into it.



I am a woman, yes, but I'm also a mother of two sons, 23, and 20 years of age. I started up our organization five months ago, in response to the experience my youngest son (and thus, our whole family) is going through since he was arrested and jailed on charges to do with having "underage sex with a minor".



One of the hardest parts for him to deal with, as well as the rest of us, was the fact that this girl was his girlfriend...and that she lied about her age.



She presented herself to us all as being 17, at the time, my son was 17 as well. Now, 2 1/2 years later, we find out she was 14 years old. Let me tell you, she did NOT look anywhere close to 14 in my eyes...



What does this have to do with you, you must be asking?



Just wanted to show my support, and say that today when I found your blog, I realized it was most likely the ONLY blog I've found that tells the truth about these matters. Although the subject I was reading under was "False Rape Claims", it still holds some pertinent information that is relevant to our cause.



Nowhere else have I been able to read, and completely agree with the claims that women (and girls) in increasing numbers, and of increasingly younger ages are perpetuating these crimes, with full and complete knowledge and understanding of the consequences.



It is a travesty of justice that females are still (in this day and age) believed in all circumstances to be the "victim" in these cases at all costs, even when it was obviously consensual. Lawyers, lawmakers, and law enforcement alike still cling to the old addage of anyone of the female sex as being the "weaker" or "gentler" sex, and males, unconditionally being the "aggressors".



Even when its put in the faces of the "powers that be", they choose to deny and ignore it.



One needs only check out the social networking pages these days to see 14, 15, and 16 year old girls representing themselves to young men as much older. Here in California, the age of consent is 18 years old.



So, my son has been sitting in jail for 5 months now, while this girl has gone on to lie to other young men, continuing her behavior, and with the ways our laws are set up, will never see a day of personal responsibility or consequences for herself.



Thanks again for putting the word out there on these kinds of crimes. What you are doing is invaluable to those who read you!



~Heidi

California for Romeo and Juliet Law AH is a bigot ... Harry As a young man, I feel duty bound to say that it's not just women who think your blog is vile. I do too. You make me feel ashamed on behalf of our gender, who are clearly responsible for the oppression of women throughout history.



Hoping you reject bigotry soon,



Max



Hello Max,



As a young man, your experience and learning are somewhat limited at the moment. You need to wake up, and grow up. Besides which, I have never suggested that men were not mostly responsible for 'oppression'. In other words, I suggest that you try to think when you read. You have been indoctrinated and brainwashed all your life, and my guess is that, as a result, you immediately assume that anyone who opposes feminism is a 'bigot'. But it is you who is the bigot; not me. Proof? Peruse my website at your leisure, and see if you can find anywhere where I claim - or imply - that men are not responsible for 'oppression'. You will not find such a claim. Indeed, you will find that your accusation has no substance at all. In other words, it is you who is the bigot - and who makes bigoted claims It is you who jumps to bigoted conclusions without evidence. You have been conditioned - like Pavlov's dogs - to react with negativity and without thinking towards anybody who does not follow the creed that you have been brainwashed into believing. Which leads to bigotry. Bigot ... ... a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn



A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigot



bigoted - blindly and obstinately attached to some creed or opinion and intolerant toward others;

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn ... That's you! Best Harry should rape researchers use polygraph tests? ... Hi Harry, In relation to your recent musings about compiling accurate data on false-allegations: Would not the routine polygraphing of men accused of rape offer an accurate insight into how many of them have been falsely accused? A polygraph test, when performed properly, is extremely accurate. If I were an academic, conducting such a study, I'd choose to polygraph a cross-section of men accused of rape. I'd then offer the same test to their accusers. For those men who have been falsely accused and pass the test, I would not find it unsurprising if their accusers refused to take a polygraph test. Those women who've been genuinely raped would be more likely to take the test, and pass. Whereas their rapists would be unlikely to participate. I think you can see where I'm going with this. Another idea would be to offer a polygraph to all men who've been convicted of rape. The results would no doubt provide interesting and accurate data. Just my two-penneth worth, but I dispute the assertion that it's difficult to obtain accurate data on false allegations. Best regards, C Hi C Yes, statistically, I suppose that you could add some useful data to false allegation research by employing polygraphs. However, I suspect that in most cases the main issue would be to do with consent rather than with what actually happened, and I am not quite sure how a polygraph would be able to sort out all the complications. For example, .... "Did you at any time throughout the situation believe that she did not want you to have sex with her?" "Yes." Well, this could sound like rape. However, I suspect that it is often the case that a man thinks that she does not want sex to begin with but that, later on, she appears to have a different attitude. No doesn't always mean No. Furthermore, it would be easy for a woman to pick on some particular point in a scenario wherein it would be true to say that she did not give the impression that she wanted sex. For example, a woman might be resisting sex all evening but then change her mind. Well, I could go on all night with this, but I think that a little thought will show that the issue of consent is too much of a problem. And an enormous amount of bogus interpretation and bias from the researchers could easily enter the process of determining whether or not a rape had occurred. After all, the polygraph test does not involve a discussion, it revolves around asking very simplistic questions. Furthermore, as time goes by, both accusers and defendants will start to rehash their memories in accordance with what they want to think. And so by the time that the researchers get their hands on them, the idea that polygraphs of their statements will be valid seems untenable. Polygraphs are probably of some value when it comes to simple questions such as, Did you do this? Did you do that? But when it comes to questions concerning complex beliefs and attitudes - particularly in reference to past events. I cannot see them being very useful. Indeed, when thinking about consent, it is even possible to imagine realistic situations wherein he thought that he was raping her, but she didn't! And it is also possible that they BOTH thought that he was raping her, and yet this is what she wanted. And, more commonly perhaps, neither of them thought that he was raping her, and yet she didn't want sex. And then you would have to look at all the various ins and outs, and at how they changed with time throughout the course of the interactions. My point is that the whole area is fraught with horrendous difficulties and complexities when it comes to understanding what went on in the minds of the people involved. And then there is all the posturing, the posing, the game-playing and the little misunderstandings that typically go on in MOST of these sexual situations. All in all, therefore, I suspect that polygraph tests in MOST of these situations are not going to get us that much closer to the truth - even for research purposes. Best Harry Are the powers-that-be setting men up? ... Hi Harry,



Having read every single article twice now (that I'm aware of) I can safely say that I agree with pretty much everything you have said and have confirmed many notions that I have had at the back of my mind for years.



Except for one.



As you have mentioned there are many groups that have a vested interest in stirring up hatred towards men in pretty much every aspect of life.



Their obviously well planned advancement on the lives of the people have left a question burning the back of my head for some time which none of your articles seems to address apart from saying that the rising MM is unstoppable, unfortunately I didn't find that exhaustive of the issue. The question as follows;



Are we, men, playing into their hands by forming the MM? Have they already taken the reaction of the men they are marginalising into consideration and planned accordingly?



Thanks.



C Hello C Yes, is the answer to your question; because the more problems that they cause to men (and to the population in general) the more do governments and government workers manage to get more power, jobs, pensions etc. As such, the growth of the MM, which is definitely going to increase the number of societal problems in the short term, could well have been something that they were quite happy to see happening; and, as you suggest, perhaps they did believe that the MM would play right into their hands. However, I get the distinct impression that the internet empowers the people sufficiently well to enable them to put a stop to their heinous self-serving games. This was very obvious after 9/11 and throughout the first three years after the invasion of Iraq. Three years! For three years the Bush administration (and the Pentagon) just could not see how powerful the internet was becoming. For example, I was truly gobsmacked over the hopeless attempt by the Pentagon to deceive us over the incidents surrounding Jessica Lynch's supposed 'escape' from the Iraqis. They also seemed totally unaware that 'unfavourable' photographs and films from Iraq could so easily end up on the internet within hours. They made blunder after blunder. Quite clearly, they thought that the media coverage of this war could be controlled just like it was a decade earlier; with the first Gulf War - where, for example, the Americans got away with spinning a whole load of false allegations about the behaviours of Iraqi soldiers; e.g. that they were bayoneting babies in Kuwaiti nurseries. And there were so many other lies and deceits emanating from the White House and Downing Street after 9/11 that were, clearly, going to be exposed via the internet, that it became obvious to me that those in power were miles behind people like me! LOL! But, then again, I was living in cyberspace and they were living 'out there'. My point is that, quite clearly, they are not now as all-powerful and as all-seeing as they once were; though they are desperately trying to regain this power by increasing massively their close surveillance over us, But, no longer, for example, can the president so easily give a nod and a wink to a group of mainstream media proprietors and, through this, manipulate the news and the opinion makers; because the internet remains untamed. And so the upshot is that while they can now watch us very closely, they cannot actually control the flow of information to the public very well. Loosely speaking, therefore, they have gained enormous power because of the internet (and other technologies) but they have also lost power because of it. The good news, however, is this. Their increase in power comes from their increased ability to monitor. But increasingly monitoring the MM simply means that the MM will get further inside the heads of those who are doing the monitoring! And so, if you like, the MM (which I see as a 'consciousness' - one that is building up in cyberspace) will eventually invade the minds of millions of those who work for government - at all levels. It is our 'way in', if you like. And so while it is true that, as you suggest, the growth of a men's movement might well have been something that they thought would play into their hands, I suspect that the internet has scuppered this hope - and that they now feel quite threatened by the MM. Well, those who are really aware of it will be. And I can assure you that some of my own favourite activist targets are accommodating very nicely - but slowly - to my 'demands'. Just little me. So can you imagine how big a threat they will face as the MM grows? And so they will gradually back down. (These people might be self-serving, but they are not stupid!) I promise you that the MM (this consciousness) is going to be huge and unstoppable. And I am not just saying this. About four weeks ago, for example, I wrote to a high-court judge who had irritated the hell out of me over an injunction that he had issued concerning something which I cannot mention. In a nutshell, and because I cannot give any specifics, I yelled at him as if he was a child. LOL! And I called him all sorts of names; "arrogant twerp" being one of them, LOL! x 2 But my point is this. I would not dream of doing such a thing unless I had him over a barrel. Because no way am I going to end up in serious legal trouble! In other words, I would not have done such a thing unless I was confident about my own 'power' with regard to the particular matter that was being addressed. Just little me; knowing the internet, and knowing how powerful it can be for activist purposes - and letting him know it. The guy might be brilliant at law, but he clearly had no clue about what is going on out here, nor about what can be done over the internet. And I 'won' - just by showing him what could be done should he, perchance, continue to offend me so. I recently gave a more specific example of this kind of 'power' over at MND, which Google threatened to delist from its NEWS section as a result of an article written by someone over there that was considered 'inappropriate' in some ways. I reprint here what I wrote to Mike, ... ............ ... fear not, Mike, for if MND were deGoogled, I am sure that, let us say, three of us combined, could play merry hell with Google ... and that Google would soon change its tune.



Indeed, it would provide great practice in Activism.



Is Google too powerful? Yes



Is Google infringing copyright? Yes.



Is Google making money from hate sites? Yes



Is Google making money from people calling women sluts? Yes



Is Google selling sleaze? Yes



Is Google biased against Republicans? Yes



Is Google invading people’s privacy? Yes



And no-one in his right mind at Google is going to suffer all that [continued negative publicity and aggravation] just for the sake of unblocking a ‘lil old site like this one.



They’d be fired!



So, I reckon that you must not worry too much about Google.



Worry a little – but not too much – because I feel sure that we could turn the matter round in the event of a de-listing. ....... Thus, people with power and/or money are, in fact, quite vulnerable to serious activism on the internet - even from just a handful of committed activists. So, how can the MM not succeed? Furthermore, at some stage, the mainstream media are bound to open up the doors to the MM because they will lose their audience and, hence, their revenue if they continue to fail to address issues of concern to 'men'. And, in some small way, they are already doing this via their comments sections. And so, in summary, while it might be true that government was initially quite happy to sit back and watch the MM begin to grow, because this would give the powers-that-be further justification for various forms of 'oppression' (something which has, in fact, happened as a result of activity by F4J) my own belief is that the internet has turned the tables very significantly. Well, let's hope so! LOL! Best wishes, Harry western women are ignorant ... Dear Harry, I am a 15 year old American girl. I think that your website is not only entertaining, smart, and eye opening, but empowering for both men and women. It's obvious that most Western women are not only extremely emotionally disturbed, violent, and ignorant, but they feel entitled and they are not able to think critically or logically. It saddens me that many of my peers are already calling themselves "feminists", claiming to be victims, and complaining about the injustices of men. I don't want to waste any of your time, but I would like to thank you for getting the facts out there in an entertaining and awesome way. - L On prenuptial agreements in the UK ... Dear Harry, ive been reading your website on and off for about a year now. And although i dont agree 100% with what you say, i agree with most of it. Anyway, i got my own business which ive built from the ground up. I own a home, which i work incredibly hard to pay the bills on. Im 32 years old, single and honestly dream of the day of being happily married to a beautiful woman who fills my valuable free time with romantic weekends away and long walks through the countryside. But alas i know this will never happen. I despise the majority of english women. And the ones i dont are already taken. I thought that a nice eastern european woman would make my dream come true one day. And a prenuptual would end my paranoia of loosing everything ive worked so hard for. Thats until i read this http://www.terry.co.uk/pre-nuptial.html Regards, an extremely unhappy and f**ked off man. S Dear S Yep, I'm afraid that the article is correct. Pre-nup agreements in the UK are worthless. They are just a way of lawyers making money - and divorce judges do not even need to look at them, let alone enforce them. In other words, they are well and truly worthless. Women are permitted to break their marriage contracts and any prior agreements with impunity - the whole idea being to make men extremely reluctant to marry and to destabilise established relationships by continually offering women numerous incentives to break them. Finally, please do not delude yourself when it comes to finding a 'a nice eastern european woman' because if you are living in the UK together her mind will eventually be poisoned by the feminist-dominated media, by the government, and by other women. In the UK, even your children will be trained to see you as unworthy. Best wishes, Harry Where have all our rights gone? ... Hello Harry, I have been posting lately to the comments section of a blog called "The Motherlode", hosted by the New York Times. It reaches a broad audience because it is hosted by such a prominent news site. I have dated women in the New York area whose views have been shaped by The Motherlode's misandric leanings. Its main theme is that men don't do "their fair share" of housework. But lately, women viewing "The Motherlode" for a fix of man-hating have been getting an alternative point of view in the comments section :) I believe that this sort of grass-roots, hand-to-hand, post-to-post combat is an important means of awakening men to what has become of the rights they held dear since modern humans first appeared on the planet 150,000 years ago; the right to the fruits of one's labor; the right to see and influence one's children. All largely stripped of us in the west, in the last 40 yrs. It is dissapppointing to realize that the rights that men in my family took for granted for thousands of years are not available to me. T Hello T Keep writing those comments! - because I can ***assure*** you that they are helping to wake up a 'sleeping giant'. Harry In response to two questions that cropped up recently ... 1. "Are you gay?" - "Why do you keep emphasizing that gays have had a positive influence on men's freedoms?" No, I am not gay, but my view is that it was gay activists, mostly, who helped to dilute society's traditional expectations that all men had to behave like 'real men' in order to be men. And I am old enough to remember a time wherein gentle men - perhaps those who were opposed to violence - or weak men were regarded as non-men; and, probably, gay. To be a man, you had to be tough. And if you were not tough, then you were regarded as being less than a man. (Witness also the derogatory way in which computer geeks were treated and portrayed not so long ago.) Gay activism has helped enormously to loosen the powerful constraints that bound men into certain roles and it has reduced the pressure on men to behave in a very limited and strongly circumscribed manner. As such, heterosexual men have benefitted enormously from gay activism; though I accept that some gay activism has had the opposite effect. 2. "Will the furore in the UK over MPs' expenses make any difference in the long term?" Yes. Definitely. Furthermore, as I have often said, the forces stacking up against governmental powers are going to continue increasing well into the future, and the public revelations about MPs' expenses and their dishonesty is just one example of this. And these particular revelations over their expenses will assist this process even further - because they will help the public to see just how dishonest and deceitful are so many of those who hold high positions. But we must go much further - because it is not just the politicians who are corrupt. We have civil servants and academics lying through their teeth in order to build their empires, women's victim groups forever lying about their various abuse figures, and so on. There is much to be done! I also get the sense that politicians (and some judges) are beginning to wake up to the fact that they are supposed to be on the side of the people, not on the side of the executive. And if we, as MRAs, can keep on pushing and pushing these people to do their jobs properly - part of which is to protect us from corruption, dishonesty and injustice at the hands of the state - then we will go far in achieving our aims. After all, the whole point of having politicians and a parliament was to protect the people from being subjected continually to the whims of those who presumed to rule over them. The various kings and their cronies were supposed to be made to answer to the people via their parliaments! But we seem to have had the very opposite happening recently - with governments and their officials now colluding with politicians to interfere with and to control just about everything that we do. Can't do this. Can't do that. Must do this. Must do that. And they are also taking 50% of our money! And this is because the kings and the politicians have joined forces to form a new ruling class. When do you ever hear politicians (especially left-wing politicians) arguing for lower taxes, fewer restrictions, fewer laws, fewer regulations? Almost never! And so, of course, MRAs must continue to do their very best to undermine them and, indeed, to undermine everything and everybody that causes men to be disadvantaged. And with regard to the scandal over MPs' expenses, I do not really have any doubt that MRAs have, in fact, had a hand in bringing it to the public's attention. I cannot actually haul out a string of evidence to support this particular view, but I do have a very good nose when it comes to sniffing out the various links that are connecting different groups and ideas together (organisms!) and I can definitely sense that there is a greater awareness of men's issues unfolding from left to right on the political spectrum - at least, here in the UK. And, in my view, this is currently manifesting itself via a growing anger towards those who are seen as being responsible for all the misandry. And it is this anger that, in my view, helped to spur the Telegraph onward in its attacks on all those MPs who had been fiddling their expenses. This would not have happened even one year ago. This anger is coming from somewhere. And my belief is that the many thousands of comments received by journalists and columnists (a good proportion of which are now coming from MRAs) are stirring up the emotions and lowering the respect levels on many fronts. In the near future, therefore, I do expect to see some politicians start talking about men's issues, though I imagine that they will do this rather obliquely to begin with (because politicians and media folk are positively deluged with female histrionics whenever they dare to talk about concerns that men might have; e.g. see Oxford Ladies.) Indeed, yours truly has been emailing various lofty folk recently to warn them of what is in store for them if they continue to ignore men's issues - and I continually remind them that 80% of political activists are male, and that MRAs are nowadays getting through to these activists. The implications of what I say to them are, generally, very simple. If you want to remain popular - if you want your profession to be held in high regard - if you want your organisation to be profitable - then stop bashing men and start supporting them - or you are going to find yourself coming under increasing pressures of various kinds. This is exactly what the feminists, the gays and the blacks did - with much success - and this is exactly what MRAs should be doing, and are doing. So, Yes, the expenses scandal will definitely have long-term implications, but it will likely be just a small part of the process through which the government - and the feminists - are finally put firmly in their place. Affirmative action is the problem ... Hi Harry, The article you have on your site about men being redundant is ludicrous. Not ludicrous that you have it on your site, but the whole premise as to why men are looked at is completely flawed. The reason is simply "Affirmative Action". Period. Women used to be the butt of jokes and commercials on television, because they are inferior and acted that way. THEN they were given not only equal rights, but superiority in our cultures....and it's not like they deserve what they got. ... I found it interesting that last night, as I was looking at the mail form I was sent to renew my driver license, on the form it basically said "If you are a male between the ages of...you need to register with the Military Service". Hmmm. NOT women. Only men. Right...women are strong. Women have become incredibly abusive, and are wallowing in the power corrupts frame of mind without even knowing it. Men are looked at as boobs because the women can get away with it. Men used to do it to women....women now do it to men. ... I work with women who have to ask each other all the time if they are making the right decisions. Used to be that you needed to. But I could make a joke about how many women it takes to get a project off the ground...all of them. I'm not impressed with how weak women are where I work now, and several places I've worked in the past. They can say anything they want, but we guys have to keep out mouths shut for fear of reprisals. And if you think about how many men have lost their jobs here in the US, millions, and that there has been a major net gain for women during the same time, it is obvious what the issue is. ... And the media also hypes women who are in the military, and like to say "Our men and WOMEN in the Service are heroes", etc. ... From the stories about men being accused of rape, and the women go free even after it is revealed that they lied and ruined men, to the many women teachers lately being arrested for having sex with young males and get off with lighter sentences than men get when they do the same thing. The fact of the matter is that women are just men with vaginas. They are as violent, conniving, hateful, aggressive and on and on. ... Until we men get over the fairy tale view of these evil creatures (not all of women are...necessarily) being sweet smelling, nice and decent people, we ARE going to be viewed as unnecessary and decadent. Women are hateful, and depressed. And what do hateful, resentful depressed people do? They bash others who aren't. Western culture has made a mockery of what men are, how they are viewed, and what their role is. I am a tough male, make good money, can outsmart ANY woman, and I have senses, decency, and respect. I am not your typical male, so I think I can see objectively what is going on. ... We've let this sh*t go on long enough. Please keep up the great work. It is through sites like yours that men are understanding that they are being abused, used, and played. We ARE the stronger sex, smarter, more decent than women can ever be. Take the gloves off from the shackles of Affirmative Action, and you'll see men come to life. D Hi D Thank you. Nice piece! Much appreciated. But I do fundamentally disagree with your notion that "Women used to be the butt of jokes and commercials on television." - because they were no more the butt of jokes than were men. Indeed, I remember when the wailing feminists here in the UK managed to get Benny Hill off the air (in the 70s, I think) because he was - or so they alleged - 'misogynistic', that my eyes began to open up to the utterly mindless spitefulness and stupidity of feminist women. After all, Benny Hill clearly worshipped women. His entire humour was based on himself continually being portrayed as a complete buffoon who worshipped the very ground upon which women walked. As such, the idea that he hated women could not be more ludicrous. And, just as now, we could see TV programme after TV programme portraying men as wife beaters, murderers, child molesters, perverts - the whole gamut of badness - and here were the feminists proclaiming that women were the ones being portrayed in a negative light by the TV programmes because of Benny Hill! It was utterly ridiculous. But the mainstream media began to accommodate to these revolting women because they were terrified of the ongoing bad publicity and the wailing hysteria that was being generated by them. But, to repeat myself, I see no evidence that women were portrayed particularly negatively in the olden days when compared to men. It is true that women were sometimes portrayed as helpless in some way - e.g. when it came to fixing the car, or figuring out where the oil went. But, firstly, this was very mild humour based on the TRUTH and there was nothing malicious about such humour and, secondly, this was exactly how women, themselves, wished to be portrayed - because it got them out of doing certain chores and because it made men feel protective towards them. Indeed, women were (and are) enhanced in the eyes of men when they are helpless or incapable, but men are not enhanced in the eyes of women when they are portrayed as such. And the feminist trick is to hide this truth when they complain about the way in which women were portrayed compared to men. Furthermore, and for example, fifty years ago, if you portrayed a particular woman as being unable to cook, then this would have been an insult - but it would not have been an insult to portray a man in such a way. Similarly, if you had portrayed a man as being unable to lift a heavy load, then this would have been an insult - but it would not have been an insult to portray a woman in such a way. (On the contrary, such a portrayal would have suggested to men that women should be helped when it came to such chores.) Indeed, women make their living out of being weak. It is, in fact, their strong point. And they know it. This is why, for example, they always try to look 'vulnerable' in some way; e.g. via their clothing, their make-up and their shoes. And so when, for example, you see women being portrayed as helpless in some way in some old film footage, this was very much consistent with how millions of women wanted to be perceived at the time. So, please forget this idea that women were the main butts of all the jokes fifty years ago - because it is not true. Further, the mainstream gender jokes from 50 years ago were extremely mild and good-natured. And there was just no way that any mainstream media organisations would have gotten away with insulting women. Women might find some of the humour insulting now but, at the time, they did not feel this way about it. It is only because numerous women nowadays get power by being permanently offended, and because so many of them think that they are so superior that one should never make jokes about them, that even the mildest of humour can send them into a menstrual rage. So, please get out of your head this notion that women were portrayed worse than men in the olden days, because this is definitely not the case. Best wishes, Harry PS Even in Roman times, death was often seen as a fitting punishment for insulting someone's mother - no matter how lowly she might be. PPS The Daily Mail article does indeed go off colour when it comes to talking about why men have ended up in this unhappy state of affairs - but I posted it up mostly because it listed so many examples of misandry. Subject: Testimony from a Female Who's Been Around the Block & Agrees ... Hello Harry I'm a female, been around and you've got a lot of TRUE stuff to say about my (99.9%) of my sisters. Stumbled upon your website and found it most interesting. Would it be possible for you to cite more sources - not links? That's too much trouble, I know. I grew up with four brothers a Mom and Dad who was away working (necessity) most of the year: Mom was it for the most part and did one hell of a job because SHE WAS STRONG, focused and no pathetic wimp. She was my hero. We all turned out well, highly educated and accomplished except for my sister who hates men but loves her Ph.D (fat, bitter and cruel). I love men, understand them and have a terrific son of my own. Because I grew up with 4 brothers whom I loved, I learned about men and how they think. Men are so basic, so uncomplicated, so logical! Treat a man with respect and he will slay dragons for you; I know; I've been there - many times. Harry, I never played games because I'm strong, confident and celebrate the differences: I adore men; they adore me - as it should be. To this day, (and I've been a jock forever) I can sincerely ask a guy at the gym if I "can borrow his muscles" to remove heavy weights - which I can't because I'm a woman and can't life 200 lbs (hello?) which is twice my weight. We understand each other. Women are pathetic weaklings and moochers. They zero in on the guy, stop sex after marriage and take him for all he's worth. I don't think they will ever change; they're too stupid. If they had any brains, they'd stop giving it away: so simple. Let a man be a man and work for it; don't take the challenge away from them! Men have given up their kingdoms for the women they love and built them monuments like the Taj Mahal. Why? The women were smart. You go, Harry! And you may use my name. Mary men are always the perpetrators ... Hi Harry Firstly I have been enthralled by your website since first stumbling across it a few days ago. Perhaps I should explain how I came to find it. I work as Crisis Outreach worker in a rough part of Melbourne. Its strictly short-term case management and revolves mainly around housing issues. I grew up in the UK and moved out here a few years ago. I was looking for any services that could help one of the families I currently work with. It’s a family consisting of 2 adults (male & female) and 5 children under 16 with another one the way. The thing is that the father of the children has an intellectual disability, is completely illiterate and is regularly physically, emotionally and verbally abused by the female family member. She controls all the family income and his life is not dissimilar to that of a servant. When I was told of this my instant reaction was to call the national “Family Violence” line to get him and his children out of the situation ASAP. I had recently attended the “mandatory for all people working in welfare” family violence training and was pretty sure of the answer I got. (Incidentally when I attended the training, the women giving the training made it very clear that the framework was written for women and that it could not be used for men escaping domestic violence. When challenged they said that it was the way it was and it was not going to be changed??) When I called the number the woman on the end of the line chortled as I listed the abuse this poor man was going through. This number let us not forget is the line women who are fleeing domestic violence call. She then said, and I quote “well we can’t help him”. I then asked if I had called the Family Violence line or Women’s Line. She answered that “men are always the perpetrators of violence” and that was that. There only suggestion was to call the men’s referral line which I did. The men’s referral line stated that all they could do was offer him generalist counseling. They stated that “they work with perpetrators of violence, not victims” Truly unbelievable. I’m blown away on so many levels. Sadly the word family seems to now exclude men, unless of course they are perpetrators of violence. So many more things, I’m reeling!



All of this of course will be no news to you. Just thought I would share my thoughts with you. Regards from down under N Will a 2010 Conservative government make a difference? ... Hello AH It looks fairly likely that we will have a conservative government at the net (2010) election and I wondered if you think it will benefit men's rights? There are some encouraging signs - they seem to be broadly talking about favouring marriage and the family as the basis for society. They seem to be broadly criticising political correctness. Do you think they will go all the way and address the many issues affecting men? (or is that still too much to hope for?) However, do you think there might be the drawback of the architects of misandry in the labour government not being around to attack any more - will they get away with it in other words? Will people be interested in attacking past governments for their policies? Thanks L Hello L It looks fairly likely that we will have a conservative government at the next (2010) election and I wondered if you think it will benefit men's rights? I doubt that the Conservatives will win the next election UNLESS they support 'big government'. In other words, the conservatives are unlikely to make much difference even if they do win the next election. (See my piece Why Governments Love Feminism to understand why, at the moment, politicians cannot openly oppose 'big government' and win elections.) So, in a nutshell, I do not really expect that a conservative victory would bring much in the way of benefit to men, but I do think that it would slow down the rate of government growth. Unfortunately, David Cameron himself is fairly hopeless. He is lightweight, ineffective, desperate for power and, quite frankly, a Tony Blair clone. And the real conservatives within the conservative party are sitting on the backbenches. But, please do not despair, because the people are waking up to the nefarious activities of their governments. Indeed, I have spent much of this afternoon reading through a whole bunch of blogs and comments from UK lefties who are appalled at the way in which Brown's government has been behaving over many issues. This heartens me a lot. And this is exactly what we need to see happening; both rightists and leftists waking up to the fact that our governments and many of their workers are thoroughly corrupt and self-serving. And what we also want them to understand is that big, intrusive governments, of all persuasions, are highly detrimental to the people - in much the same way that huge corporations can be detrimental. In addition, I would point out that I still believe very strongly that The Three Great Freedoms are the route to success in the long term; i.e. the ability for everyone to receive and transmit information at all times. But what has been happening recently is that our governments have sought to access more information about us while trying to deny us the ability to seek similarly detailed information about them. For example, I believe that if government workers such as police officers can access personal details about us - without extremely compelling reasons to do so - then we should be able to access personal details about those police officers. Yep, I know it sounds crazy, but, in the long term, my belief is that this is the way in which we must go in order to curtail the ability of powerful government workers to do us wrong. Indeed, I think that there is a strong argument for the view that the more powerful are various individuals then the more should detailed information about them be made available to the public. At the moment, it is the other way round! And I am quite pleased to point out that I recently discovered that George Orwell had arrived at a similar point of view. Great minds clearly think alike! As another example, in the long term, I want to see CCTV cameras in every hospital ward and in every classroom so that those with power over our vulnerable loved ones can be monitored. The same goes for every court case. Once again, I know that this sounds crazy, but I think that this is the only way to go; particularly given the truly appalling catalogue of failures that have occurred in the UK in all the above domains wherein government workers operate. For example, we have actually had hundreds of our patients die of starvation in our hospital wards - so callous and uncaring are so many hospital staff. Basically, we cannot trust our governments and we cannot trust government workers. We cannot trust them at any level. And the only way in which we can protect ourselves from them is to ensure that we can monitor them closely while at the same time reducing their power over us. This means that we need to be able to watch them very closely indeed. Ho Hum. Never mind. Bar some major catastrophe, we are definitely going to win this war. Best wishes, Harry More advice needed from the master! ... Dear Harry I took your advice contained in your response to an email which had the heading; "For how much longer must we continue to endure? ..." It worked beautifully. In my office we often have discussions about women and feminism. I always do my best to promote the anti-feminist cause. However, I do not usually get much sympathy even from the men. So for the past two weeks I tried the tactic that you suggested, by pointing out the various ways in which government workers benefited themselves by supporting feminism. The result is that their attitudes have changed appreciably. Just as you said, the penny began to drop. Bravo. Now I want to seek more advice from the master. What is the best strategy to persuade women? Any ideas? Regards A true fan. Dear True Fan Your master does indeed have some advice concerning your most astute of questions. LOL! And here it is. When it comes to persuading the women, don't bother. You might as well try to convince lottery jackpot winners that doing the lottery is a waste of time. Now, I say this, not because I believe that women do actually benefit from feminism, but because, for the most part, they believe that they do. And the arguments that demonstrate otherwise are, mostly, a bit too complicated to get across to them succinctly. Furthermore, they believe that many of the goodies that they currently enjoy are available now because of feminism when, in fact, this is mostly hokum. The goodies that we all enjoy these days have arisen not from feminism, but from science, technology, medicine and, also, from the social/political activities of various other groups such as trades unions, gays (yes, gays), racial activists, libertarians, civil liberties groups and others. But I can see nothing worthwhile that feminism has ever done. Absolutely nothing. Both men and women would now be leading far happier lives if feminism had never existed. (Also see my piece entitled Fools and Feminists.) As far as I am concerned, feminists are, by and large, rather nasty empty-headed women who are forever seeking to stir up hatred towards men. Nevertheless, in order to return to your question, Yes, there is a strategy that undermines women most effectively when they try to support feminist principles and policies. It undermines the men too. And devastatingly so! I have talked about this strategy many times before but, in a nutshell, it is the one wherein you point out to them that they are hypocritical scumbags of the highest order if they support notions that disadvantage or discriminate against men. "Aha. I see. So you would be quite happy to see your son, your brother, your father or, indeed, yourself, being denied a job, being falsely imprisoned, educationally disadvantaged, demonised, ejected from the home, denied access to the children etc etc etc "You would be quite happy with such things happening to you or to your loved ones, would you? You would not complain about such things. "What? You say, No? You say that you would be concerned if such terrible things happened to you or to your loved ones. "Then you are a f###cking hypocrite, aren't you? "So long as you are not affected by such policies, you couldn't give a damn. But if you or your loved ones were affected by such things, then you would be wailing like a baby. "I think, therefore, that we can safely discount all the nonsense that you have been espousing earlier, and conclude quite firmly that you do believe that treating men in such a fashion is wrong. "Quite clearly, therefore, you have shown yourself to be a hypocrite - pure and simple - and a SCUMBAG!" LOL! Wins every time! And then, of course, should they looked shocked, pained or outraged at your suggestion that they are hypocrites and scumbags, you look at them and sneer. "Oh Dear, you think that I am treating you unjustly, eh? "Well, you, yourself, can hardly complain about this without even further proving my point! "You clearly are a hypocrite! - through and through." Best wishes, Harry On gold-digging Filipino women ... Greetings Angry Harry,



My name's K and I am from the Philippines.



I'll go straight to the point.



In my country, there's this trend of our own local women starting to prefer foreign guys instead of our own men. You see, our country is a very poor country thats why you really can't blame some women here who go gold-digging by tempting foreigners who visit our country.



What makes me mad though is that they keep on denying this fact that most of them are just lazy gold diggers wanting the easy way out from poverty. Here's their excuse, they say its because most Filipino men cannot provide enough these days for their own families (which obviously is not true).



Its an obvious scapegoat for their gold-digging behavior.



They still have the audacity to blame us Filipino men.



I'm having this online debate right now with a couple of women and i'm running out of bullets.



Can you help me on this? what can you say about this?



Thanks,



K



Hello K



>!'m having this online debate right now with a couple of women and i'm running out of bullets



As one MRA to another - stop wasting your time arguing with the women!



Spend your time talking to the men!



Harry Three men imprisoned for rape, on the say-so of just one woman ...



Hi Harry,



Love your site and I am female.



Sometimes I am ashamed of members of my own sex to be honest. What I have been reading about this case is absolutely appaling.



The Alleged victim admitted to lying 56 times



The alleged victim never appeared for the start of the trial and had to be brought to court by the Police.



Only after being dragged out of a house 5 Days after saying she was raped in a stairwell did she change her story and claim she was raped in a house.



Here are the facts:



H



Hello H



I remember the case. The three men served over 6 years in jail before being released; even though even the accuser's friends said that she had been lying - in order to get some compensation money.



Harry Men responsible for banking crisis ...



Hi Harry,



just a little mail regarding a Sky News report on the banking crisis by a woman who believes it was simply caused by men being men.



The woman mentioned i am unable to name, but i would guess she is into feminist and social studies, and is incapable of using plain logic.



Over all she was calling for women to take over the banking system and despite not being a reporter was given a generous time slot on Sky News to make her ridiculous and scientifically unfounded case against men.



The report was combined with an interview from an Icelandic government minister (also a woman) making the same case that men are irresponsible with money and had the banks consulted women before making risky choices the credit problems we now face would have been avoided.



More offensive was this woman on Sky News and her complete disrespect of men leaving me speechless as to how women are allowed on national television to speak of men like animals. Her claims were somewhat typical of a woman, suggesting that men "stick together" and "ignore women" as well as take "risks with money that they wouldn't do if supervised by a woman".



Her suggestions that men are to blame for financial crisis is just so ridiculous that i wouldn't know where to begin. ... Its very much my opinion that had women been in charge of our banks and treasury to begin with, the credit crisis would have been much worse, and possibly more difficult to get out of. This worries me, because as you know, women dont use their heads and dont think logically.



... The fact is men are much more responsible with money in society, and this has been backed up by numerous studies. Women tend to spend more money that men, especially on themselves. Men are raised to be carefull with money as it is them who are primarily responsible for looking after the family and providing for womens needs. The banking crisis, is just something which occurs in the global market every so often. I strongly believe this is an issue we must keep an eye on.



T Grandma approves of AH ... Hi AH, I'm a mother and grandmother from TX. I love visiting your site because my own son and grandson have been victimized by a very anti-male system. My son has fought for over 5 years to at least have his visitation orders upheld, and be allowed to even know where his son is at. His ex has been convicted of drug possession and drug delivery charges- has abandoned, abused and neglected my grandson- and the system has ignored all the motions and pleas brought before them for help with the situation. We've contacted every local, state and national representative about the bias and corruption here, to no avail. It's just about driven us insane, but we continue to try to make changes where we can, hoping that some day children will no longer suffer so needlessly, as my precious grandson does. Thanks! C. What are we supposed to do ... Hi Harry I have been reading your site since last summer and have probably read nearly all of it. It seems to me that you have a very good grip on the problems but you dont seem to come up with solutions. What are we supposed to do? What can ordinary men do to stem the tide. Could you please write something that deals with this? J Hi J Well, I cannot possibly suggest what individuals, themselves, can do unless I know about who they are, their line of work, their skills, their talents, and so on. But, throughout this site, I have, in fact, given many pointers; e.g. as can be found on my page entitled Effective Activism. In a nutshell; do your best to undermine the opposition in any way that you can. You can join the war on any battlefront that you care to choose. And if you haven't got the time to do much then you can always donate to your favourite men's website - preferably this one! The sooner that the war is won, the sooner will your life change for the better - and, markedly so, would be my guess. There is now so much men's activism going on via the internet that you will surely be able to find some niche wherein you can contribute in some way. Beyond this, of course, there is also the real world. Undermine those who disadvantage men whenever and wherever you can. If there are people in your workplace who promote misandry, undermine them. If you are talking politics with someone, undermine all those politicians and parties who fail to support men - i.e. just about all politicians and parties. If you are talking to women who support what is going on, tell them that they are disgusting traitors to their very own loved ones; particularly if they have boys. In other words, undermine them. If you are talking about the media - newspapers, TV etc - then badmouth and denigrate all those involved in disseminating misandry. The same goes for businesses and their products. Advertise and support men's activism. Push it into the consciousness of as many people as possible - particularly the men. Turn yourself into a weapon! I note from your email address that you probably work for a government department. If this is the case, then people like you should be particularly worried about the way things are heading; because your government will monitor you very closely indeed - as I am sure you are already aware. And this will continue to get worse. It is no coincidence that government workers such as teachers, police officers, social workers, civil servants etc etc are the most closely monitored workers of all. After all, the closer that you are to those who govern, the closer must you be controlled and scrutinised! The pay is good compared to everyone else at the moment, but this won't be the case for long. Besides which, what a price, eh? Furthermore, as the divide between those who work for government and those who do not grows wider and wider, the hostility towards government employees is bound to grow. Indeed, I strongly suspect that this is actually one of the aims of those in the governing elite. (Remember: the more disharmony, the better it is for them.) In other words, never let go of the fact that we are all in this together. The wholesale disadvantaging of men throughout the legal system, the health system, the educational system etc etc etc applies to all men; left and right, good and bad, black and white, day and night. And so there are not really many men out there who would not benefit quite significantly from getting this war over - fought and won. (Sure, there are many men whose government jobs currently thrive on all the misandry but even they - as 'men' - are definitely losing far more than they are gaining. There are a zillion jobs that we need government workers to do, but debilitating men - all men - is not one of them!) So, if you do work for government, then please do all that you can do to undermine anybody or any policy that endorses the current situation. Goodness me. We have now even got Harriet Harman getting away with a policy wherein even if it is proved that a woman prostitute has successfully deceived a man with regard to her true situation then it is he who will get prosecuted! If you are a man then these people are gradually taking everything away from you; your money, your liberty, your privacy, your security, your family, your time, your dignity, your country, your justice system. And this will never stop unless we stand up to them. And if we do not stand up to them, then there will come a point where we no longer have the capability to stop them. The whole system will become unassailable. And when this situation is reached, they will be able to kill you or toss you into prison without batting an eyelid. Let us never kid ourselves and believe that the days when powerful groups can get away with gross injustice and murder are over, because they are not. It only seems this way because of our current circumstances. But these are changing. In summary - undermine the opposition wherever and whenever you can. And use whatever talents, skills and opportunities that you have in order to do this. And please do not feel any guilt about doing so. These people are out to wreck your life in order to profit themselves. Let's get this show truly on the road and show those scumbags that they can no longer get away with all this. In other words: Don't just talk about it all. Don't just moan about it. Don't just tell people about it. Fight it! Best wishes, Harry AH is too offensive ... Dear AH:



I've been reading all your posts regarding feminism for a couple of months now. I agree with most of what you have to say-- some more or less than others-- but there is only one comment I want to touch on.



One of your most frequent comment is "If they're offended, GOOD!"



That, by far, is one of the most... stangest, un-relative comment you've ever made on any of your posts. I understand that you're doing this as, let's say, 'a taste of their own medicine' to the feminists who find it funny to hurt/diminish a man's character... but I find that highly... immature and unreasonable. Clearly, you see these acts as unnessacarily cruel, unjust, and just plain stupid-- then, why exactly are you doing the same thing?



By doing so, it shows us all that you... don't really care what feminists do, but you care as long as it's done to men. If you find putting men into such a horrid light, well, HORRID, and you don't agree with doing that to anyone-- why would you do it yourself?



I am specifically talking about your "Dealing with an Unhappy Woman" post. Or, as I like to call it, "Dealing with an Unhappy PERSON" post. You can rest assured that I would not approve of writing something like this about anyone-- men, women, children, etc.



Anyways, touching back: You've said before on some of your other posts about schooling: "Feminists blame school's teaching if girls are doing worse than boys. Feminists blame boys if boys are doing worse than girls." Therefore, one can claim that feminists change their moral values depending on female-vs-male.



You've said before on some of your other posts: "Feminists are cruel because they enjoy posting stuff that involve hurting men (i.e: you've said before, cutting off their penises)." Alternatively, you also say: "Me suggesting shooting females, however, is a-okay! (which, of course, I understand as a joke... but it still projects an image that you only care about your moral values as long as they benefit men.)"



Anyways, it makes you look a lot like... you guessed it-- a feminist! It's almost like someone trying to teach someone else not to do the wrong thing by committing the 'wrong thing' against them. Effective? Meh, maybe, or maybe not. ...The best way to do things? right? mature? I would like to say not-- if you've noticed, legal systems don't steal back from theives, rape rapists, or put drinkers into car-crashes, nor do teachers bully bullies in order to teach them the right thing.



The mature thing to do is to set up a good example. Setting up your post... esentially does nothing. Stupid feminists are only going to send hate-mail to you, and they'll most-likely get revenge on your revenge-post by putting up more revenge posts (see how stupi