Blog

How a certain segment of society defines manhood holds men captive within their own skin:

 

Due  to a male pride built upon a 'manhood' defined by a servitude to women,  men are ashamed to stand up for themselves. A logical ability to know  right from wrong doesn't compute with the way many men are  programmed. Few people care about men or have compassion for them.  Masochism is part of what defines manhood as males are groomed from when  young boys to 'take it like a man'.  And this false premise of male  self-worth (identity) will never allow men to receive justice. Due to  this control of the male's self-concept, a paradox exists in the male's  own right with a male/masculine pride that is hinged on opposing other  men. As is defined within the Anglo Saxon-derived culture (chivalry),  male self-worth comes at the expense of other men. Females still go for  the most dominant/successful men who play into the female-defined role  designed for them. It's little wonder male suicide corresponds now with  the opportunities and resources that supported this defined maleness no  longer existing.

       The male already had a very difficult role to assume as it  was. However, now with women not picking up the slack, but instead  adding more burden to the societal equation, men are devastated without  any recourse, with the few  succeeding at the expense of other males  only capable of having a semi-healthy existence. Those who are able to  succeed, despite limited resources and opportunities compared to the  past, are subject to many more burdens, liabilities, and expectations  (sex laws, divorce, child custody, and child support, only to mention a  few). In the past when unity prevailed a security was provided to both  men and women. The self-hating trait built into male identity is  well-realized by the societal phenomenon that women are taught to think  about themselves whereas men are taught to think about women, even to  the point of having this define their masculinity and what has now  amounted to sacrificing their rights and freedom. 


Alan Lee Millard​​

Equality of the Sexes for Dummies, Or Putting the Equality Issue into Perspective

   A way of thinking lacks any sense of  justice when it’s selectively applied to men in the mating process. For  example, men are often considered ‘cheap’ who don’t pay for women’s way  on a date. But if men are ‘cheap’ who don’t pay for women’s way, what’s  that make the women who don’t even pay their own way? (This is a status  below any friendship or one a person would otherwise—outside the dating  arrangement—even consider a friend. Are we to lower the standards for  dating that we would consider basic for creating a friendship and  meeting anyone else? And why are laws needed for, and applied to mating,  but not for creating friendships?) No matter how much money women earn  many still think they are ‘above’ paying a man’s way, which is a  disposition derived from women being elevated above men—on a pedestal.  (Women are not to be automatically considered better or more valuable  than men.)
          This is one of the many examples that reveal for  women to ever acquire an equal status to men will require they lose  their rating above men and relinquish privileges they already possess.  And what comes with this relinquishment is an equal social  responsibility to initiate mating behavior with men which is in direct  opposition to the present-day laws that further oppress men and target  male behavior in the mating process. The bottom line seems to be that  women biologically do not desire to mate and express less interest in  seeking men (other than for financial support), so financial resources  indeed served in the past as the equalizer that evened-out the  differences between the sexes compensating for sex, although even in the  past sex was not a guarantee for men although paying for the date was.  (Again, sad that women can’t meet men as they meet other women but with  the friendship merely including sexual relations.) 
          But one  thing is for certain and well revealed in this process and practiced  arrangement. Sex is not the same need to women it is to men. And this  commonly applied fact is defied when it comes to sexual activity between  men and women, with women, despite needing to be paid to ‘compensate’,  still expecting to be equally satisfied during sex which often takes  more effort on the male’s behalf than vice versa. (And even that is the  male’s fault if the female isn’t mutually satisfied!) The burden of  imbalance always lies on the male due to the elevation of women above  men in our society. And men, groomed from boyhood to be pawns as part of  their ‘manhood’ identity, readily accept this role. Pathetic.
             Oh, and then when men are right and fail to patronize women, they  supposedly hate women (are deemed misogynists) which assessment many in  their intellectual ineptness would apply to me due to my truthful  expression. If the equivalent definition supposedly qualifying as  ‘hatred’ of women, commonly assessed toward men, were consistent in its  application to men, a discrepancy would reveal, per the same terms, much  more hatred of men by women. Therefore, what’s termed as “women’s  rights” boils down to something no more than ‘Kill the messenger’. (The  truth must not be known and suppressed.) Sad that exercising my right of  free speech is deemed unacceptable if used to accurately assess the  truth regarding women. What power, exclusively possessed by women, could  ever surpass this?
            Societies that are exempt of the  chivalry component are predominantly outside our otherwise  intellectually advanced educational institutions. We can learn  (intellectually prosper) from other societies that are exempt of this  flaw.
            Most studies, especially history and the social  sciences, have been hijacked and are built upon a false concept, one  already previously conditioned by chivalry and yet further contaminated  by feminist conjecture. This is certainly why men in most cases should  never see a therapist, counselor, or anyone else deemed a  ‘professional’--an educational product of feminist indoctrination. At a  time when men are oppressed and persecuted few men have anywhere they  can go (or anyone with whom they can confide) for help to cope, which  more than likely contributes to their increased suicide rates. (e.g.  Yet, even considering this, no Office of Men’s Health exists, although  one exists for women.)
           This reveals The Flaw From Within. Read the book—a must for any genuine equality advocate. 

Modern-day Women and Objectivity

 Generally,  compared to men, women are less objective. They enter personal  interests, issues, selfishness, and favoritism into the occupational  environment despite the best interests of goals set and tasks to be  performed. This is why, with men being in charge, our society in the  past was so successful per business and employment, military, and  family. Now, all that men have created is being questioned, attacked,  and destroyed. A segment of our society consumed by hate and selfishness  (much under the protective shield of the P.C.) denies, and lashes out  against, this analogy only because the truth serves to threaten an  established power—one acquired at the expense of everyone continually  draining life from humanity. Male employees have had to walk on  eggshells in the workplace due to modern-day women’s volatile  temperament and superior status—ironically one built upon being spoiled  and entitled due to the success of men who elevated women above them.