You are on page 1of 40

Letter from the Editor:

Well, what do you know, another one done.. I'm sincerely continually amazed at the quality of the writing the ManOSphere has to offer, and these days, the growing sophistication of the analysis bodes well for the future of men. This issue advances some pretty extreme scenarios as response to the vilification, to some degree even the illegality of being a man in todays world. Many have accused those who speak on behalf of men of such things as Misogyny, Extremism, even mental illness. What all of these people have in common is a disdain for the importance of these issues. How else can one explain ignoring all of the 'meat' of an issue to merely pick at the presentation... As this thing, this movement - or this public shift in attitudes - progresses, I am more than a little heartened to see men and women of all political stripes deny the power of the PC police to tell them what to think. I am, in short, optimistic for the future, for the first time in a long time. There is no doubt about it. The powers that be have no choice, they MUST effect positive change, lest they risk someone else doing it 'for' them. The writing on the wall is getting larger, and the days of controlling the public discourse are gone - thankfully. Now, men can say what they really mean. There's no doubt this prospect scares the Established Order to no end. I contend that's their tough luck. If they acted in good faith, this wouldn't be neccessary. Since it is, they deserve no mercy. Hopefully, you agree.
Factory

10 Things I'll Teach my Sons About Women

In This Issue:

4 18 20 22 24 32 34 36 29

Editorial:

Jury Nullification and Rape Is Game in Marriage Always Worth It?


WikiLeaks: Who's Hiding What and Why.

10

Marijuana, Religion, and the First Amendment. They Were Expendable


False allegations of Rape and the Complicity of the Press

Men Devalued in Suicide Strategy


How we Kill Johnny A Reading from the Book of Zed

Contact:

menzmagazine@gmail.com

This magazine exists as a collection of blog posts considered compelling enough for publication here. The articles contained in this magazine are solely the views held by the author, and are written as opinion pieces only. Every effort is made to cite the original source, as all of the articles included in this collection are available in their original form online. All contributions, including the design and editing of this magazine, are provided on a volunteer basis. If you, or someone you know, would like to contribute their talents, please, let us know. MenZ Magazine is edited in Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.

10
by: Micah Spiracio
micah.sparacio.org

Things Ill Teach My Sons About Women

Sometimes the truth is not comfortable.

So if youre not comfortable with a reality that betrays our ideals, dont read on.

skills but dont let her manipulate you into giving them. At that point shes controlling you.

The most important thing Ive learned about women is that youve got to be indifferent to their attempts at harnessing you in an emotional net and controlling you. Sounds harsh, but youre the man. You need to be in charge of yourself. You should not be controlled. You need to lead. You need to make decisions. Forget all the nonsense about equality. Women dont want that, even if they say that they do (duplicity of intentions is not uncommon in relationships).

The story youll hear preached from the rafters of our society is that women are just looking for a few nice [read: controllable] men. Reject this narrative at all costs.

Whats important is to understand how women operate at a biological and emotional level. Ultimately, women are not looking for nice guys. They are looking for strong, confident, powerful men. Men who make them feel secure comfortable. This makes sense from an evolutionary perspective as women needed men they could rely on to protect both them and their children.

Instead, focus on being a man. Confident and capable. And dont be afraid to embrace the higher virtues like humility (just dont confuse it with cowardice) and strength (but reject the selfobsessed pride that destroys so many celebrities). Women dont necessarily need these things, but remember, your goal should be to become a great man, not a poser whos trying to pick up women. You must become the man you want to become without regard to women it is only then that you will find that the task of gaining and keeping the attraction of a woman is as simple as breathing. And by doing this you can beat the jerks and the thugs (the ones who get all the girls) at their own game. The man who spends his life catering to every whim and fancy and emotional confusion that the average women goes through is quite simply not going to be able to attract or hold onto that woman for very long. He will be used and abused and have his heart broken. Theres no reason to go through this. So, with that introduction, here are the ten things that I hope my boys come to understand about relating to women.

So dont fall victim to the stories about intentions the narratives about what they need the pleas for a nice man. Its tough. But if you forget everything else, remember this one rule: dont let a woman ever gain control over you at an emotional level. Dont let her push you around with guilt or pleas for sympathy. Stand up to her when shes wrong. Theres nothing wrong with providing comfort or offering a compliment in fact, you should master these

1. Be confident

Women are attracted to confidence. The irony is that your confidence should not be for the sake of women. It should be natural. Make yourself the best man you can be. Let your confidence derive from who you are. Aim to be the best man you can be simply because thats who you want to be. Biologically (and thus subconsciously) women gravitate towards big, strong men or men with confident personalities (sometimes coming through in humor, but humor isnt necessary). Both of these are ancient signals that the man will help her offspring survive (remember, women are motivated and act at a subconscious level, even if they dont agree at a conscious level).

2. Smile at rejection

Historically, women have been the rejectors and male the pursuers. This is just how the world works. Like it or not, youve got to be thick skinned and realize that rejection is just part of the deal for men.

The good news is that unlike the past, there are billions of women out there. So just move on. Dont let rejection rock your confidence. Learn, improve, and move on. You can treat rejection the same way you treat the training for a sport. A necessary evil.

3. Maintain other interests

Never allow a woman to consume all of your thoughts or all of your time. Harder said then done. But there are a number of reasons that you should maintain other interests (hobbies, friends, etc.)

The most important reason is that by having a life outside of your relationship or your obsession, you wont fall hard when the relationship ends. It helps you stay grounded. It helps you move on when the time comes. Remember: you never want to be consumed by a woman, because then shes in control. And she really doesnt want that. Trust me.

4. Enjoy the company of guys

Make sure to have a core group of guy friends that you spend time with on a regular basis. Have fun. Be active. Be a guy. Tell dirty jokes.

And never abandon your guy friends for a woman. If the woman tries to dominate your time, its time to move on. It may be hard, but the minute the woman starts trying to control you like shes your mother, the relationship is stale and its time to get the hell out of dodge.

5. Understand hypergamy

At a biological (subconscious) level women are always trying to upgrade. Men have a hard time understanding this because for most men, at a subconscious level, all that matters is that a woman have a certain level of fitness. Any woman who meets that threshold is fair game. Doesnt matter if shes an upgrade or downgrade. With women it is different. Women are constantly keeping their eyes out for an upgrade (usually in the form of acquiring more power). But they are also constantly keeping their eyes on other women that might be a threat to their current situation (flirting with other women on occasion, within view of your partner, is a great way to fight hypergamy). So why does this matter? Well, because awareness is the key here. Dont for a second think that the girl you are with transcends her biological nature. Be prepared. Women are not nearly as innocent as the media portrays.

But it matters even more because you can do things to control hypergamy. 1) dont be a pushover 2) dont give her emotional control over you (once shes dominated you, shell definitely start looking for the next guy) 3) keep relationships with other women and flirt from time to time

Most importantly, prepare yourself for reality. Dont get caught off guard. Know what you want. Keep an eye out. Confront. And be prepared to walk away.

6. Be ready to let go

There are a billion fish in the sea. There is no one woman who was made just for you. Dont buy the Disney nonsense. Sure, there are some women who will fit your personality better than others and certainly some that will be more attractive than others. But the sea is so large dont despair. The minute your girlfriend or partner starts jerking you around or treating you like shes your mother or using shaming language of any kind or just acts like an entitled princess, its a sign that its time to walk away. But there might be other signs too. Is the girlfriend spending too much time with other guys? Let her. But not on your dime. Dont think. Just end it. And once you end it, stick to your guns. Be patient. You wont have to wait too long for the next potential friend to come along.

7. Enjoy the company of other women

Remember, youre the man. Youre in charge of your life. And really, at a biological level (forget the sociocultural sublayer), thats how she wants it. Keep female friends. Keep your girlfriend on her toes. Give her subtle cues that, sure youve chosen to be with her, but you could also walk away at any moment and replace her. Oh, and dont hesitate to flirt with other women from time to time. Its the antidote to hypergamy.

8. Get good at something

Gaining skill is about the best confidence builder there is. Men need to build, to create, to invent, to solve problems. I dont care if its learning how to play the guitar (the obvious chick magnet) or learning how to hunt deer (less so). Find something you enjoy and throw yourself into mastering it. And dont get in the habit of giving up. Learning is a long process and often it takes a lifetime. Just stick with it and keep working through those plateaus. By having a skill or a set of skills, you will gain independence and selfreliance. You will feel confidence in your abilities. And you will always have something to fall back on and gain comfort from if the people in your life fail you.

9. Ditch the nice guy stuff

A friend once said to me: Things changed when I became a nice guy. Women started to hate me.

Your goal is not to be nice. Your goal is to be a confident you. Theres no need to be an arrogant prick or a bad boy. You can beat the thugs and pricks and bad boys at their own game. All they have going is that women perceive them to be strong, confident men. And thats what women want. You can outdo them by being strong and confident and smart. Oh, one other thing. Its out of fashion, but you shouldnt be afraid to maintain the high ground as an honorable gentleman. A guy who treats his woman well, but who also isnt afraid to walk away with dignity when she starts playing games.

10. Your body matters

Screw the nonsense that its whats inside that counts. Sure, in an ideal world, that would be true. But this is not an ideal world. Thats one thing I am certain of.

Treat your body like a hobby. Turn it into the most fit machine you possibly can, but have fun with it. Go for hikes. Enjoy nature. Learn to gain peace from solitude. Eat the fuel your body needs. Dont put junk in the gas tank. Eat lots of meat, vegetables and nuts and drink lots of water. And do it for yourself. Not the women.

On Jury Nullification and Rape

By Paul Elam avoiceformen.com

With the possible exception of the sexual molestation of a child, rape is a crime that evokes the most visceral of responses from the average person. And for good reason. Sex that is physically forced or obtained by threat of harm sadistically reduces victims to their most helpless state, and leaves lingering damage that may well last the remainder of a persons life. It is fitting then, that we seek to justly punish those guilty of the crime, but also that we proceed with caution and diligence, ever observing the rule of law in the process. That rule of law is integral to maintaining order; to preventing justice from being circumvented by political motives or mob rule; to ensure, as should be ensured in a just society, that the rights

of the accused are protected with vigor and transparency. Regardless of the personal repugnance we may feel for any crime, including rape, we must remember that without an overarching concern for justice, laws invariably become nothing more than the instruments of tyranny.

ground to dust in the name of convictions, and to our national disgrace, in the name of sexual politics. Whereas feminists lament what they call a rape culture in todays society, we actually live in a false rape culture, and it is in growth mode.

10

Unfortunately, where it concerns the crime of rape, that tyranny has been upon us for quite some time. With the epidemic of false rape reports, poor and sometimes corrupt police work, prosecutors blind with power and ambition, and an unconscionable but successful feminist campaign to define rape in the most ludicrous terms possible, we have created a monstrous system of abject injustice, with rights of the accused routinely

It seems every day there is a news story about a man freed from prison after being falsely convicted. Just recently, two Texas men were released from prison who had been falsely convicted of rape in separate incidents. One had served 27 years, the other 19. Thats two men, at the same time, not just from the same state, but from the same city.

Both men were from Houston,

and their stories are being repeated around the country, revealing a somber reality that continues unimpeded. There are a lot of innocent men in prison for the crime of rape. And much worse, our capacity to identify and exonerate them is overwhelmingly exceeded by an unjust legal system that continues to put them there.

most of my reputation [by] vigorously prosecuting rapists. I was amazed to see all the false rape allegations made to the Denver Police Department. A command officer in the Denver Police Sex Assault Unity recently told me he put the false rape numbers at approximately 45%. Silvermans experience is not isolated.

Bases around the world, 45% were discovered to be fraudulent.

The Innocence Project, which seeks to free individuals falsely convicted and incarcerated has overwhelmingly had the most success with the crime of rape. In a review of the 251 cases in which they have succeeded in freeing innocent men, nearly all of them were for sex crimes, and their average length of incarceration was 17 years. Most of those were freed only because they were lucky enough to have DNA evidence that could be evaluated. Many others are not so fortunate. While the laudable efforts to free the innocent must continue, it is clearly time to seek to understand how we got to such rampant injustice, and what we can do about it. And that begins with a candid examination of what happens in a rape prosecution, from beginning to end.

Just recently the Orlando Police Department made the public proclamation that false rape allegations have become an epidemic. Last June the Baltimore Sun reported that police claimed that more than 30% of rape accusations were deemed unfounded. Louisville and Pittsburgh reported similar numbers.

This 45% of cases are not ones that could not be proven or for which a suspect could not be apprehended, but cases that were proven to be fabricated by the person filing the complaint. 27% of the false claims were admitted after the accusers were asked to take a polygraph test, or having just failed one. Keep in mind though, that these are good results. All these false claims were discovered by diligent investigators who were seeking the truth. But what happens when police are not so careful? 33 year old William McCaffery

It all starts with a police report; a compliant filed by a private citizen alleging that a rape has occurred. And that is where we encounter the first of many problems. As the facts would have it, the chances of a rape accusation being true are barely more predicable than the toss of a coin.

A longitudinal study conducted by Professor Eugene Kanin concluded that over a period of nine years, 41% of rape allegations studied were fraudulent, concocted by the alleged victim to either create an alibi, seek attention and sympathy, or to seek revenge. And there is the McDowell Study cited by Warren Farrell in The Myth of Male Power, which concluded that of 1,218 reported rapes on Air Force

spent four years in a New York prison because a false rape claim from Biurny Perguero Gonzalez, who alleged McCaffery had raped her after she accepted a ride from him when she was intoxicated. The truth was that her acceptance of the ride from McCaffery had angered her girlfriends, and she made up the rape story to turn their harsh feelings into sympathy. When questioned about the

Former Colorado prosecutor Craig Silverman once opined, For sixteen years I was a kick ass prosecutor who made the

events, McCaffery cast blame at the officials, including the arresting officers, the prosecution.

Everyone, he said, wanted to believe the lie. The ADA (assistant district attorney) first and foremost.

deleterious effect on the real victims of rape, but did not utter a word about the men at risk for being wrongly placed behind bars as a result of the allegations. This type of police complicity in the false rape culture, by

exception, and not even the most extreme. Mary N. Kellett, a prosecutor in Bar Harbor Maine, is making a career of rape cases. She is averaging one indictment a week, from a population of less than 60,000. Her most notable case so far has been against Vladek Filler, who was convicted of raping his wife, with no forensic evidence, and only her word that the rape occurred. The conviction was overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct and Kellett is appealing the case to the Maine Supreme Court. The chronology of this story is lengthy and the details somewhat complicated, but have a look, and a good listen, to the following recording of police interaction with Fillers wife. youtube.com/watch?v=GsKIc QhjaJg

And that is the status quo. While arrests for making false allegations appear to be on the increase, the norm has been to treat the criminality of the reports as a mental health issue. Crystal Gayle Mangum, the notorious liar in the Duke Rape Case, was referred to counseling, as was Danmell Ndonye, the woman who falsely accused five men in the Hofstra Case of gang raping her in a mens room at a school dorm. The police themselves add to the problem. In the Orlando, Florida story, the NBC News affiliate reported statements by police that that they do not want to arrest these women. In fact, they only seemed to notice the problem when it got so out of hand that it was causing a stress on resources within the police department. They also noted the

ignoring and enabling this criminal activity, is a cornerstone in the current crisis. And while they now publicly bemoan the false allegations, they show no signs of recognizing that the epidemic they face is partly of their own making; that it is, quite literally, the chickens coming home to roost. And where the police leave off, the prosecutors go into overdrive. Mike Nifong, the supposedly rogue prosecutor who pursued the Duke rape suspects long after there was abundant evidence to exonerate them, has become the poster boy for false rape culture. Nifong, while getting massive amounts of coverage from the media, was hardly the

This is what passes for a credible complainant in a modern rape case. This is the compelling reason to put a man behind bars. Kellett is clearly a prosecutor out of control, but she is nonetheless still serving as an Assistant District Attorney, and rumor has it she has ambitions to run for the District Attorney when her boss retires. The Innocence Project gives a detailed breakdown of the factors that play into bad convictions, both from police and prosecutors. Key factors range from coercion of defendants, to knowing use of false testimony (suborning perjury) and a host of other unscrupulous tactics.

12

To find a shelter in your area that accepts men, please visit our Google Map project at: http://tinyurl.com/DV4men

Here first, is the breakdown for police actions, representing nearly half of the first 74 people exonerated by The Innocence Project.

that holds the remains of our presumed innocence and right to a fair trial.

Ostensibly, rape shield laws were enacted to limit a defendants ability to cross examine a plaintiff regarding her past sexual conduct, the logic being that such information was not only irrelevant, but might prejudice jurors. For instance, if it were brought out that a married woman alleging rape had engaged in extramarital affairs, it might cause a bias in some jurors that strongly disapprove of such behavior and prompt them to acquit her alleged assailant. It would seem reasonable, until you go back and review the information provided by The Innocence Project and consider what this type of system does with these kinds of laws.

And now the breakdown for prosecutorial misconduct on the same group.

In 1998, Oliver Jovanovic was convicted and sentenced to 15 years to life for kidnapping, sexual abuse and assault. It was alleged that he held 20 year old Jamie Rzucek in his apartment against her will for 20 hours while he brutalized her with sadomasochistic torture. Rzucek testified against him for six days in court. In light of what is going on in our legal system, Kellett is no more a rogue than Mike Nifong. looking the other way when a crime is committed. Liars, whether shedding fake tears or wearing uniforms or arguing before a jury, cannot be allowed to so subvert justice that we abandon the law itself. For it is the law, when justly and rightly applied, that gives us the checks and balances to overcome those who abuse the system. Enter, however, Rape Shield Laws; the final nail in the coffin During the trial, the judge, under the rape shield statutes, refused to allow email communications that the she sent to Jovanovic after the incident, among other evidence.

It is the system that is rogue; Kellett and Niphong were/are just an unusually visible parts of it.

Even given the rampancy of false allegations and misconduct by law enforcement and prosecutors, this is still not justification for

Later an appeals court found that the judge had misapplied the laws and the conviction was overturned, but only after Jovanovich had served 20 months in prison, during which he was attacked and injured by another inmate.

The email from the woman that was excluded? In it, she described herself as quite bruised mentally and physically, but never so happy to be alive. And in another communication, she said, the taste was so overpoweringly delicious, and at the same time, quite nauseating. It was also revealed that in the early part of the relationship the woman had expressed an interest in snuff films (films where actors are actually killed or death is simulated in a fashion as to appear real, for sexual stimulation).

million for damage to his life and reputation, also asserting that the prosecution had prior knowledge of other false rape allegations made by the woman. An attempt by the city to have the case dismissed was denied by a federal judge. A case grabbing even more headlines was that of Marv Albert, a formerly legendary sportscaster who pled guilty to assault stemming from an allegation made by his then girlfriend, Vanessa Perhatch. In a story that put Alperts admittedly unusual sexual proclivities in living rooms across the world, he was accused of sadistically biting Perhatch during a sexual assault.

Under the circumstances, Albert was compelled to either plead to a lesser charge or face very severe penalties at the conclusion of a trial. He opted for the former, was completely disgraced in the public eye, and in the process became nearly unemployable. He was last seen playing a sidekick role on the television show Marriage Ref.

Despite the conviction being overturned, and the prosecutor, Linda Fairnsteen, knowing about the exculpatory evidence, she still wanted to charge and retry Jovanovic. It was only when Rzucek, having to face the certainty of questions about her emails, refused to testify a second time that the case collapsed and was dismissed with prejudice. In 2004, Jovanovic sued the city of New York, seeking $10

There are many more of these cases that are known, and undoubtedly many more that will never see the light of day. They are part an parcel to a system gone woefully astray, even if the original intent had some merit.

Withheld from evidence by rape shield laws was Perhatchs history of aggressive and vindictive actions against men who left her (Albert was about to be married) and the testimony of a former boyfriend that claimed that biting was a normal part of sex play for the woman.

And there are more problems with many practices in courts during the course of a sexual assault trial. In some cases, the court will erect a partition; a screen that separates the alleged victim from the defendant, the logic being that the sight of the him will cause traumatic stress.

It has the prejudicial power of putting a sniper in the room

with a gun trained on the defendant in case he decides to jump up and rape the plaintiff during proceedings. It is clearly the presumption of guilt, legitimized by the same court that is supposed to protect the presumption of innocence. These are all problems in need of a solution. And solutions are not forthcoming.

practice tyranny and innocent men are ground to dust along with their rights?

depending on the application.

What do you do when these concerns are dismissed out of political expedience by a system that has built, with the majority of public support, a brick wall around its own systematic malfeasance?

For instance, a 1930s white jury finding a white male not guilty of murdering a black man despite a mountain of evidence that points to a conviction would be an immoral application of this principle.

It would seem clear that reforming or eliminating these laws is in order. But neither is likely to happen. Imagine the professional life expectancy of a politician that tries to address this in the legislative sense. He, or even she, would be immediately branded as pro rape by feminist academics throughout the western world, and the profeminist machine we call the mainstream media would assassinate their image till they could not get a job alongside Marv Alpert.

But on the other hand, what would you think if a cancer patient were on trial for possession of marijuana, and you knew that drug was the only resource they had to help them tolerate their chemotherapy? Would it be immoral to ignore the law and let them go? The law is clear. Marijuana is illegal. If they were in possession of it they were breaking the law. Should we not then send them to jail?

Police are not going to help. They are a fundamental part of the problem. Prosecutors? Kellett? Who, Mary

Now, I am not comparing an accused rapist to a cancer patient, but simply pointing to the fact that when the legal system fails to seek justice, when it is, in fact, undermining the very concept of justice, juries are equipped to put a stop to it. Now what if you are on a jury in a rape trial, and you know that it is highly likely that evidence that may be exculpatory has been deliberately hidden from you? What if you think there is a genuine possibility that the trial is more about the career of the prosecutor than about the pursuit of justice? What if you know you cannot trust what you are seeing?

No. This is a problem so intractable and entrenched in the culture that any attempt to address it through conventional means is certain to result in failure and vilification.

So, what do you do within the system when the system is the problem? What do you do when laws that purport to serve the cause of justice can be so easily wielded as an instrument for revenge or the next rung up on a political ladder? And when there is all but impunity for those that do so? What do you do when courts

Extreme circumstances call for extreme measures. And there is no better example of extreme than in the way this false rape culture has run common decency and sacred rights into the ground.

One possible extreme is jury nullification. When a law or system of applying laws becomes the source of injustice, jury nullification has long been a viable option. Nullification occurs when a jury acquits a defendant despite the weight of evidence against him. It is legal and completely moral

In your mind, here and now, I challenge you to ask yourself. What kind of impact do the answers to these questions have on the concept of reasonable doubt? And I would argue that if you

16

Now, as to nullification, it is easy to conclude that the chances of getting 12 people on a jury knowledgeable enough of the system to see it for the railroad that it is, are highly unlikely. Actual acquittal is out of the question. Never happen. But it still takes unanimity to convict. It takes unanimity to convict on retrial as well. It takes only one to bring the system down, even if only for the time being. And it is a system so tainted that it quite clearly needs to be undermined for the sake of justice. There are people that will react to this with outrage and indignation. How could you? they will demand, How could you let someone walk when the evidence shows you that they have committed something as heinous as rape?! And the same people, after reading account after account of innocent men being imprisoned, raped, tortured; destroyed, on lies, will reveal the utter depravity of their indifference by refusing to face what is happening or acknowledge that it even matters. Their idea of justice is just as corrupt and selfish as the false accuser. They want only punishment, and only where it suits them, at any cost. They care less for the rights of men than Mike Niphong, and their objections should be discarded as quickly as they are raised.

are aware of how the system actually works, then you must be aware that reasonable doubt cannot be ascertained in a rape trial. There is just not enough trustworthy information in many cases to make that judgment, and unfortunately as a juror, you are not able to discern if the

case you are seeing is one of the ones that has been tainted. There are perhaps exceptions to this. If the state is able to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt that breaking and entering, an abduction, the use of a weapon or extensive bodily harm occurred during the alleged attack, then a guilty vote may be justified.

But I say perhaps for a reason. Remember the Jovanovic case? He was convicted of kidnapping with the other charges. It never happened. The Albert case as well. There were injuries involved there. All consensual. And he was convicted anyway. So even with these possible exceptions the state could be running a political circus instead of a legitimate trial.

Is Game in Marriage Always Worth It?


by: Welmer thespearhead.com

Chateau/Roissy, Hawaiian Libertarian and others have written a lot of good stuff about how important Game can be in marriage. Theyre right a woman who perceives her husband as in charge and on top of things is a lot more likely to stick around than one who sees him as a pathetic beta provider. So its pretty obvious that putting some effort into maintaining ones confidence, self assuredness and wit is important to keeping a marriage alive. Guys who neglect this are at least halfway down the path of divorce.

18

However, one thing I dont see all that often is a discussion of the unsatisfied, unhappy married man. In our gynocentric culture, we have scores of films, songs, books and TV shows that that detail the dissatisfaction of wives with inadequate husbands, but it appears to be taboo to bring up the fact that plenty of men arent all that happy with their wives. Whether its taboo or not, its a very real phenomenon that is, unfortunately, an exceedingly common problem.

and lives with the sense that his life could be a lot better if hed never married his wife in the first place. The corporate manager is divorced, but then remarried for some reason or the other. Ive only seen him with his wife once; the rest of the time hes been with other women, and his wife with other men.

Several of my friends/acquaintances are guys who remain in marriages because they dont have a viable alternative. Ones a lawyer, ones a cop, and anothers a corporate manager. What they all have in common is that they feel stuck with their wives. Often, they unload their frustrations while talking to me. My cop friend is totally alpha as far as the term is understood in the manosphere. He doesnt take any crap from his wife, stands his ground, and buries shit tests immediately. However, he is far from happy in his marriage. His wife, although she complains at times, is devoted to him, but he just isnt all that interested. He told me this evening that hes sick of sex with her, is at his wits end about her irresponsible spending, and would rather be spending more time with his kids than working 12 hours a day to pay off credit card debts that she runs up. My attorney friend is not even close to satisfied with his wife, who is most interested in the suburban status game. He feels like a caged animal,

There are millions of men out there who are stuck in similar situations, but they tend to stay with their families because they think its the right thing for the kids, and also because they know that theyd be absolutely ruined if they pursued divorce. So what do we have to offer these men? Sure, we criticize women for leaving because they are merely unhappy, but shouldnt we take into account that men are sometimes unhappy in their marriages as well?

theres no tomorrow, who lets herself go physically, who is a nag or who makes no allowances for the husbands normal recreational pursuits isnt exactly inspiring a man to be confident and masculine in her presence. If anything, hes resentful, tired of her, and on the defensive all of which are antithetical to Game. Sure, a case could be made that tight Game will bring a woman around and get her to start working out, cooking, saving and acting like a good wife, but sometimes its a pretty tall order, and its pretty hard to motivate oneself to put all that effort into a wife whos already become an unattractive harridan. What do guys do in this case? From what Ive seen, they simply go through the motions, and often things subsequently fall apart and the guys take the blame.

It seems to me that blaming marriage breakups on mens lack of Game is another one of those examples of unfairly placing all the responsibility on men. In fact, whats most telling to me is that, for all the feminist criticism of the manosphere and Game, Ive never seen a woman suggest that theres anything wrong with gaming ones wife. It may be true that marriages break up when a man stops being the kind of husband that a woman wants, but we ought to keep in mind that this often follows the wifes failure to live up to some minimum standard that would keep a husband satisfied. This may not always be her fault, but often it really is. A wife who blows cash like

It seems to me that if men are expected to maintain some level of alpha behavior around women, they need a woman whos worth it. Therefore, making a marriage work is not only on the shoulders of the man its up to wives as well. If family law didnt automatically punish men and reward women for annihilating families, women might actually take that seriously. In short, Game cannot be a panacea without some balance in family law. Without a return to equity, women have no incentive to make themselves worthy of their husbands devoted efforts.

Wikileaks: Whos Hiding What and Why


By Fred Reed
Two ways exist of looking at Wikileaks, the site that publicizes secret military documents and videos. The first is held self interestedly by the Pentagon and by Fox News, the voice of an angry lowermiddle class without too much education. These believe that Wikileakers are traitors, haters of America, who give aid and comfort to the enemy and endanger the lives of Our Boys. Implicit in the Foxian view is a vague idea that the leaks give away importantwell, stuff. You know, maybe frequencies of something or other, or locations of ambushes or, well, things. Important things. The Taliban will use this information to kill American soldiers. The notion is vague, as are those who hold it, but emotionally potent. The other view, held usually by people who have some experience of Washington, is that the Pentagon is worried not about the divulging of tactical secrets, but about public relations. Wikileaks doesnt endanger soldiers, insists this way of looking at things, but the war itself, and all the juiceful contracts and promotions and so on entailed by wars. The American public.

fredoneverything.net

In recent decades the military has almost achieved its wettest dream, the separation of wars from the American population. The fielding of a small volunteer army prevents the riots on campus that helped to end the adventure in Asia long ago. Embedding reporters with combat units pretty much prevents coverage that might upset people. The media for whatever reasons are now complicit, declining to air what really happens on the ground. All of this allows ghastly behavior, which is what wars always produce, to go forward with little opposition.

killing pedestrians in a city street, and apparently having just a swell time doing it. This didnt reveal military secrets. But it showed the gusnip crew as the butchers they are. Bad juju for the military. PR is all. The pattern holds. Remember when the White House furiously suppressed video of torture? The Taliban would have garnered no tactically devastating details. But men screaming, choking, crying, bleeding, beggingeven the patriotic might gag.

Ah, but leaks, YouTube, holes in the wall of silencethese pose real threats to the flow of contracts. If you dont think that contracts money have a great deal to do with wars, reflect that all those hundreds of billions of dollars end up in pockets, and those pockets do not belong to soldiers. Makers of body armor, boots, ammunition, helicopters, on and on, are rolling in gravy. All this halfwatched loot flows in cataracts at the price of at most sixty dead American kids a month (and lots of brain damaged droolers, but what the hey). A bargain. Afghans dont count. Note that the Pentagons orchestrated screaming has not been about technical data that might in fact get GIs killed, but about revelation of the ugly things the US is doing to people. Consider the footage of an American helicopter gunship

Why are the fun and games at Guantanamo kept secret? Watching a man die under torture does not make it easier for the Taliban to ambush Marines. In no way would it endanger American forces. But it would endanger the war. The golden goose.

Which is obvious if you look at what the military (the president, remember, is commanderin chief) actually does. Remember the militarys frantic efforts to suppress the photos of torture at Abu Ghraib, photos of prisoners lying in pools of blood while grinning girl soldiers play with them? These had zero tactical importance. They did however threaten to arouse the Pentagons worst enemy.

Then there was the photo of the hideously wounded and dying GI that was (miraculously) published in the New York Times. SAD Robert Gates (Secretary of Alleged Defense) said that the publication was irresponsible. Oh? How so? The Taliban could have gotten no militarily useful pointers from seeing an expanse of red gushing meat (the leg looked to have been nearly severed). But people in Kansas might look and think twice about the war. The whole profitable circus rides on keeping things abstract. The war isnt children looking at their entrails in brief puzzlement as they bleed to death. (Just what do you think happens when you bomb a village?) No. It is about Islamofascism, the Gates of Vienna, national security, the

War on Terror, and it is done with precision weapons that kill only the evil ones.

Remember when Bush II forbade the photographing of coffins coming back into Dover AFB (I think it was)? That lamentable president said the prohibition was to protect the privacy of the dead. (The inside of an anonymous coffin isnt private?) Those photos contained no military informationbut they could have made the public think. Bad. Very bad. The Taliban can keep the war going, which is fine for the military, but they cant end it. The American public could. No more contracts.

It works. A decade into the war, Fox cheerleads onward, interviewing former CIA thisses and military thats, generating a warm glow of togetherness aimed perhaps more at liberals than at the Islamowhatevers. The Wickileakers are putting Our Boys in danger as they risk their lives for Freedom and Democracy.

Next to sex, the strongest human instinct seems to be to form groups and hate other groups. I have long suspected that the bulk of humanity has more glands than neurons. It never changes. I need a drink.

And I especially dont care that Proposition 8 was overturned. Family values being threatened, a sacred institution being destroyed, the will of the people being defied by an unelected star chamber, blah blah blah. Bite me. When are you conservatives going to campaign for something that matters, instead of chasing the shiny baubles the liberals wave in front of your faces? When are you going to stop wasting time on pointless side issues and get serious? Homosexuals getting married isnt a threat to the American family this is:

I dont care about gay marriage

Can you think of a single instance in which the information to be revealed was of military value? The detailed workings of an IED detector? The name of a Talibani secretly working with the US? The date and place of an attack by a team of Special Forces? Or is the suppression always aimed at keeping Americans in the dark?

There is of course a great deal to hide in any war, but particularly in one such as that in Afghanistan. In any guerrilla war, the soldiers quickly come to hate the locals. In Afghanistan, as in Viet Nam, virtually no American speaks the language, the intelligence outfits are clueless, the troops dont really care who they kill, and pilots bomb according to their own or some intel weenies guess as to who they see on the ground. Atrocities, intended or not, occur daily. All of this has to be lied about, concealed, papered over. Concealed from the American public, I mean. The Afghans already know about it.

If you need me, Ill be at the bar getting shitfaced. Ferdinand Bardamu inmalafide.com

Marijuana, Religion, and the First Amendment


by: Mike LaSalle
THEN GOD SAID, I GIVE YOU EVERY SEEDBEARING PLANT ON THE FACE OF THE WHOLE EARTH, AND EVERY TREE THAT HAS FRUIT IN IT. GENESIS 1:2930 Good Friday, 1962, fell on April 20. That morning, 20 university theology students all men delivered themselves into the hands of Boston University researchers in the basement of Marsh Chapel. Each participant was handed a gelatin capsule and a glass of juice. Ten of the students in the room would wash down a hefty dose of naicin an over the counter B vitamin gauranteed to evoke a hot flush, or at least a tingling sensation on the skin.

mensnewsdaily.com

Now flash forward to this 2006 John Hopkins University press release:

The other ten were each handed a capsule containing 30 mg of psilocybin a psychoactive drug found in psilocybin mushrooms. Almost all the Divinity students who ingested the psilocybin reported a significant increase in their perception of God or Spirit. The control group showed no such results. The study therefore offered empirical evidence for the causal connection between entheogenic substances and spirituality. That was almost 50 years ago just as modern Prohibition was getting underway. Not long after that the federal government shut down further research along these lines for decades to follow.

Using unusually rigorous scientific conditions and measures, Johns Hopkins researchers have shown that the active agent in sacred mushrooms can induce mystical/spiritual experiences descriptively identical to spontaneous ones people have reported for centuries. As the electorate has changed over time, the baby boomers the first postindustrial generation to be widely introduced to entheogens like Cannabis have begun to populate the voting booths and power positions formerly occupied by another generation. Even without the new academic research, it is easy to demonstrate anecdotally that entheogens had widespread

Photo illustration:

22

religious, spiritual and mystical uses in preindustrial societies. It is likewise reasonable to assume that human societies have used entheogens for tens of thousands of years. Certainly nature has selected our neurological systems to be receptive to Cannabinoids:

Cannabinoid receptors are one of the most numerously occurring G protein linking receptors in the brain.

(wiki).

As a religious practitioner, I chose to believe this is not an accident, but a measurable anthropic coincidence. The use of entheogenic medicines by qualified practitioners is an age old and distinctly human inheritance that no Government can legitimately outlaw.

In this matter I invoke the Harm Principle, wherein law enforcement has no prevailing interest in arresting qualified practitioners who grow and use Cannabis for private entheogenic purposes. The Prohibitionist is further burdened by the fact that the personal domestication of the Cannabis plant is itself a wholesome and healing activity much less one protected by the First Amendment.

dawn of civilization. Over thousands of years of prehistory, agriculture was THE signature feature of the human race. As a species and as individuals, we are behaviorally pre disposed to engage in some form of domestic agriculture or related enterprise. But successful husbandry of the Cannabis plant for entheological purposes requires careful nurturing over time. A person must learn to nurture the plant before they can get the psychological reward of getting high. (Otherwise, they are simply growing hemp a valuable domestic biomass resource in its own right, but not suitable as a entheogenic Sacrament.)

Marijuana garden, an urban grower is given a lesson in the procession of life. In this way God speaks symbolically through nature, leading by example, and practically suggesting a course of action: Nurture the plant, nurture each other, nurture the world. Unfortunately, in the postmodern world, men have become increasingly disassociated from their original anthropic profile. We used to be hunters, or planters, or warriors, or medicine men, or shaman; its only recently have weve been turned into a paler version of Thomas Anderson from The Matrix

An anthropologist or behavioral psychologist would admit that the reward of getting high is itself a motivator. That is, to receive the reward, the Cannabis religious practitioner must plan, plant, tend, harvest, and prepare the crop in an ordered sequence over an extended period of time. Cannabis husbandry is an empowering, positivelyreinforcing and spiritually productive human activity; it is precisely what men have been doing since before the

Thus the planning, planting, tending, and harvesting of a Cannabis plant at home is an explicitly existentialist act if you assume that getting high is a spiritual experience which it is. Over the 6month authorship of his

It is time for Neo to wake up. The war on drugs is a naked failure. We are all prisoners of its effects. It is time to end prohibition. A plant must be released from dumb bondage. Legalize it, tax it, regulate it, and get over it.

They Were Expendable


elusivewapiti.blogspot.com

by: Elusive Wapiti

By they, I mean the men and males of yesterday. They were expendable because they themselves thought their lives worth less than the women in their midst. For the better, I see this attitude changing, despite attempts from oldschool men, who, after having been so conditioned, cant think any differently, and lifeboat feminist womenwho reap unearned benefit from male sacrifice, and, worse, consider themselves worth more than men and therefore entitled to itto resuscitate, through shaming and manipulation, this dying tradition best left to wither and expire. To lead off, Ill quote the usually excellent Robert Heinlein, but in this case, he shows his stripes

as a hopelessly selfhating romantic, devaluing the male while elevating the female to the acme of society:

be the patriotic duty of right thinking men:


I said that Patriotism is a way of saying Women and children first. And that no one can force a man to feel this way. Instead he must embrace it freely. I want to tell about one such man. He wore no uniform and no one knows his name, or where he came from; all we know is what he did. In my home town sixty years ago when I was a child, my mother and father used to take me and my brothers and sisters out to Swope Park on Sunday afternoons. It was a wonderful place for kids, with picnic grounds and lakes and a zoo. But a railroad line cut straight through it. One Sunday afternoon a young married couple were crossing

Men are expendable; women and children are not. A tribe or a nation can lose a high percentage of its men and still pick up the pieces and go on as long as the women and children are saved. But if you fail to save the women and children, youve had it, youre done, youre through! You join Tyrannosaurus Rex, one more breed that bilged its final test

24

This quote was not a oneoff, for heres another from Heinlein clearly showing that he considers male sacrifice for the benefit of females, even unrelated, random females, to

these tracks. She apparently did not watch her step, for she managed to catch her foot in the frog of a switch to a siding and could not pull it free. Her husband stopped to help her. But try as they might they could not get her foot loose. While they were working at it, a tramp showed up, walking the ties. He joined the husband in trying to pull the young womans foot loose. No luck Out of sight around the curve a train whistled. Perhaps there would have been time to run and flag it down, perhaps not. In any case both men went right ahead trying to pull her free and the train hit them. The wife was killed, the husband was mortally injured and died later, the tramp was killed and testimony showed that neither man made the slightest effort to save himself. The husbands behavior was heroic but what we expect of a husband toward his wife: his right, and his proud privilege, to die for his woman. But what of this nameless stranger? Up to the very last second he could have jumped clear. He did not. He was still trying to save this woman.

When the Titanic sank in 1912, women on board had a 75% higher chance of survival than men, and children a 52% higher survival rate, because women and children were placed on lifeboats first. In a humane society, women and children first is a testimony to the bravery and chivalry of civilized men. Emphasis on the word civilized. For barbarians, the standard is much different. In the past few months, the world has witnessed how cultures rooted in brutal, millenniaold practices treat vulnerable women and, more tragically, innocent children. Last month, Del Awar, aged seven, was taken at dusk from the yard where he was playing. Del was found hanging in an orchard the following day. According to those who saw his slight body after it was cut down the bruises and scratches around the young boys neck suggested his murder had been neither quick, nor easy. As punishment for the absurd crime of supposedly being a spy for Hamid Karzais government, the Taliban, made up of men, carried out the execution. In Iran, cowards of a similar breed prepare to mercilessly stone a caring mother to death. [The woman], Sakineh, was convicted of adultery while married in 2006, after which she received the punishment of 99 lashesSakinehs skin was sadistically and systematically peeled away from bone and muscle during a brutal, male inflicted flogging that even strong men cant endurea kangaroo court, similar to the one that hung a sevenyearold boy for spying, reopened the case because the woman was then suspected of murdering her husband. Sakineh was acquitted of spousal murder. Acquittal aside, the adultery charge was reviewed and a death penalty handed down on the basis of judges knowledge a loophole

that allows for subjective judicial rulings where no conclusive evidence is present. A subjective ruling without evidence is one of many shining examples of Sharia Law. How about if Americas Muslim friendly president instead denounces Islams barbaric practice of stoning women and hanging children?

But it doesnt stop there. Another man, witnessing the growing popularity of lesbian chic, declares that men are apparently useless to women sexually these days:

Lest anyone claim that said attitudes are indicative of the old ways of thinking, I give you columnist Jeannie DeAngelis at the American Thinker. She breaks out the shaming language in spades in a column from just last month, casting as barbarians men who dare do harm women and children. The implication of course being that those of us men in other cultures who witness it and let it pass are equally as uncivilized. Of course, such name calling is merely whitefeather neocon exhortations to make war on other cultures because they dont do like we dothe usual leftwing whinging about how cultures are equal curiously absent:

I was recently reading about yet another bevy of young women who are opting for pelvic refreshment with other women, and it struck me that the abandonment of men as sexual partners might not just be a fashion of our times, but an entirely natural process. Indeed, it might well be that women are naturally drawn to one anothers beds like bees to blossoms, and that only the need to get someone to make babies, or do the Neolithic equivalent of unblocking the loo, is what caused cavewomen to agree to have sex with cavemen in the first place. Otherwise, sexually speaking, the girls get on very nicely without us.

I suspect that the taboo on lesbian sex was created by dominant males and their female allies because, deep down, so many women preferred female bodies, companionship and sexual skills. But men need women in ways that women simply dont need men. Theres no general equivalent for women of the female prostitute, the call girl, the courtesan or the mistress for different classes of men have always resorted to paid female

sexual companionship. Sexually frustrated women have either abstained or, long before Anne Summers, looked after themselves.

Lesseewith the Heinlein quotes, we have an appeal to ancient, maybe even hardwired tribal traditions to protect the womenfolk, traditions invented and reinforced through the millennia when ones civilization was constantly on the knifes edge between survival and oblivion.

children, do they still merit automatic male sacrifice? What is the patriotic fellows role since native American women have failed to uphold their (reproductive) end of the grand bargain?

There are two problems with this conceptualization, however. First, it is hard to make the case that, in a society that numbers over 300 million, as the modern American country does, individual womenfolk require such protection. We have far far more breeding pairs than we require.

Second, the flip side to such gentlemanly selfsacrificial behavior is the implication that said women are worth saving because of their potential as breeders. Of course this assumes that women wish to be viewed as breeders, which a great many do not. But more importantly, a great majority of native American women fail to actually become breeders, and if they should deign themselves to actually whelp a child, a great great many fail to do so in sufficient quantities to replace the population. Except for the right Mormon women in Utah that is, who have the highest fertility rate in the country. This then begs the question: if so many native American women refuse to have children outright or, having had a child, have failed to execute their full duty by having more than 2.1

DeAngelis quote hardly needs any more amplification. Men are inhumane and uncivilized if they do not voluntarily surrender their lives for the benefit of women and children (why is it that women and children are always paired together? Isnt it just as valid to say men and children, particularly when automatic father custody used to be rule in Western Civilization?), even if those women and children are unrelated to him. Men are barbaric for protecting the sanctity of the marriage bond, for enforcing female chastity, and for seeing to the security of the State, all three of which are goods in which women benefit greatly and suffer equally greatly when they are absent.

little amplification, given the usual audience of this blog, it does merit a bit of commentary, for it represents a very strong undercurrent in the culture that perpetuates the principle of the disposable male. As we have seen, men are lambasted from both left and right, from both males and females, heck, ABC even has an entire series ["What Would You Do?"] dedicated to instill a sense of shame in othersusually men, for men are apparently expected to intervene to help vulnerable womenfor failing to risk their lives, even die, so that unrelated women may live on in comfort and security. A good example of this would be a recent Time magazine cover, which featured the mutilated face of an Afghan girl.

DeAngelis makes quite a bit of hay about Sakineh Mohammedi Ashtiani, a woman sentenced to death in Iran for adultery. Yet I note that Sakineh was also convicted of sleeping with two men out of wedlock in 2006, one of whom was also accusedalong with herof killing Sakinehs husband. I could not find any mention in media anywhere of the fate of either man she fornicated/adulterated with. Were they put to death? We do not know, partially because, as we see in this case, our culture only cares about gruesome death when it happens to women and/or children. Yet while Angelis quote needs

Such obvious agitprop seems to have but one purpose: to beat the war drum and rally flagging American support for the effort to install mercantilist feminism at the point of a gun in Iraq and Afghanistan. And provide fodder with which to motivate/shame American men into risking their lives for the benefit of women on the other side of the planet.

26

From whence does this supposed duty come from? The best bottomline source I can think of is the Bible, where Christian men were exhorted as husbands to lead and sacrifice for their wives and families, and as members of a Christian community to take up arms in its defense. Clearly there was an expectation that men had the responsibility to use their resources and strength for the good of their wives and children and for their tribe. The responsibility was theirs, as a duty uniquely inherent to being a man. Thus was established the precedent for men to sacrifice themselves for women and for children, even women and children not related to him. Armchair heroes and heroines from then on graded a mans worth by how willing they were to sacrifice themselves for the benefit of women.

How does a man respond when traditional patriarchal marriage has been stood on its head and, rather than being an institution where men and women team economically, physically, and spiritually to raise the next generation, has instead been converted into a vehicle to transfer wealth from

usedup empty husks unable to sustain a longterm relationship?

How should a man react when his freedom has been traded for temporary security by recentlysuffraged women, when the machinery of government had been perverted to conscript him to be a government sharecropper for the benefit of highranking men and women nationwide? Indeed, how should a man respond to womens and other mens lecturing of him for failing to rise to or die in, as the case may be the defense of such women whom are not his wife or his mother, sister, aunt, or niece?

Yet women, for their part, never quite satisfied with a good thing, have thrown off the old restrictions in a vain search for something better. This tectonic shift that relieves women of their social roles yet retains those for men leaves men in somewhat of a quandary: how does one act toward a woman who is a ruthless peer competitora competitor that enjoys social and legal advantage in nearly every way over menin the workplace, yet demands deference in the social/familial sphere?

male(s) to female? How does a man adjust when the traditional ways of finding a mate male initiation and female choice become a minefield of sexualharassment charges and rape accusations to be successfully navigated? How should a man react when supposedly more virtuous women relentlessly pursue serially polyandrous couplings with successively higherstatus men, to include thugs and criminals, shunning perfectly good men like him until they are threadbare, shopworn,

The same way they have been responding, I am afraid: with indifference. It is someone elses problem. The male willingness to act has been driven underground; in its place, a sense of selfpreservation has taken root. The armchair heroes and heroines may bang on about where all the good men have gone and how cowardly the current crop of men are, but they are apparently ignorant of the fact that these good men have been driven away by women themselves lacking in virtue.

Having heard, loud and clear, Maureen Dowds declaration that men are not really all that necessary, men, being the gentlemen that they are, have stepped aside and are permitting the feminine to drive for a while.

The third quote, citing the growing feminine fascination with lesbianism, strikes me as true insofar as womens flexible sexual appetites are concerned. But what Myers does not address is that, while women may very well have rejected the notion that they need men, in their mad dash to make love to themselves, they also seem to have conveniently forgotten that they are still quite dependent on men for security, prosperity, and safety. A society where the male half is not enfranchised is not one that survives for very long, for the distance between moon shots and skyscrapers to mud huts and foraging parties is quite short. Indeed, women would do well to remember that it is the men they devalue who provide the very scaffolding that holds society up and permits women to labor comfortably in air conditioned buildings:

To those armchair heroes and heroines who tsktsk at men who balk at risking their lives for women who are not their wives, mothers, sisters, aunts, or nieces, I ask: what purpose are you serving in your exhortations? Is his costbenefit analysis really that selfish and short sighted? Does he have that little to live for? Does your reactionary urging serve to pull society back from the abyss?

Or are you merely propping up a corrupt system that holds men to their traditional roles as providers and protectors while releasing women from theirs as chaste, faithful mothers and nurturers? Are you pursuing justice, freedom, and equality under the law? Or are you enabling the continued trafficking of men into slavery on the government plantation, stripped of their rights under the law and their children at the same time?

should demonstrate to all that a society that loses large proportions of its men is a society with its future very much in jeopardy.

And to those particularly men who think that men are expendable and that a society can well withstand the loss, either through death, warfare, or social ostracism / incarceration of a large proportion of its men, I suggest that the data speaks otherwise. The example of the urban ghetto

For it is men and men alone who bequeath the gift of civilization to women and children. The society that loses its men faces many of the same challenges that a society that loses a large segment of its women the inability to propagate and socialize the next generation of society. The lives of men are too important than to be just thrown away in furtive efforts to protect those who may not deserve it. Women and men both would do well to value men for the invaluable contributions they make to society.

False allegations of rape and the complicity of the Press


www.articlesaboutmen.com by: Andrew Bolt

THE lynching of Theo Theophanous the Labor minister falsely accused of rape just became even more shameful.

This week the Australian Press Council took an axe to The Age, which first let loose the defamation that cost Theophanous his job, his reputation and much of his savings. In October 2008, the paper published on its front page an exclusive interview with a woman who claimed shed been raped by Theophanous, a friend, in his State Parliament office. Shed been so devastated, she claimed, that she suffered a nervous breakdown and had to move in with her parents in Greece. Now shed defy Theophanouss threats: Im prepared to stand on the steps of Parliament with a banner saying, I want justice.

Theophanous had not even been interviewed by police, let alone charged, yet was already named and savagely shamed on the front page of The Age. So toxic is the mere accusation of rapist that within days he was forced to step down as minister, and a year later, career shredded, quit Parliament.

Yet his accuser (lets call her Helen) had her anonymity protected by The Age and still does today, even after being found by a court last year to be an entirely unreliable witness at times barely clinging to reality, if not her sanity as she made claims lacking credibility, reliability and truthfulness. Nor was that the only problem I noted on day one with this Age story.

desperately unreliable woman ring truer than they were. As the Press Council this week revealed, Age executives knew before they published their exclusive that their reporter, Carolyn Webb, was a friend of Helen and had stayed with her in Greece, which meant she clearly had a potential conflict of interest that could have skewed her report. The Age also knew beforehand that Helen had given Webb inconsistent versions of her story that differed in key respects, even to the extent of the date and place of the alleged rape.

Four days later, the Sunday Age followed with a devastating profile of Theophanous, which used largely anonymous sources to portray the minister for major projects, industry and trade as a violent, lecherous, lightfingered and treacherous shonk, whod use moral blackmail to hush his victim. Already alarm bells should have rung in the skull of any reader with even a skerrick of a brain or a sense of fair play.

For instance, Helen took 10 years to report her alleged rape, which she explained in part by claiming she didnt think (she) had the strength of financial resources. Pardon? A complaint to police doesnt cost a cent.

Whats more, Webb had failed to check the rape allegations with two women Helen named as witnesses women who later told a court that Helen had lied or sent them doctored emails to invent conversations theyd had about her rape. None of this stopped The Age from publishing a story it should have doubted. Worse, it failed to tell readers either that Helens story had changed, or that the reporter was her friend.

Another odd thing: Helen claimed Theophanous had pestered her for years afterwards with flirty text messages, and had tried to see her. Odd behaviour from a canny politician with a terrible crime to hide.

As I wrote that same month, why was the accuser given every protection and the accused almost none?

But little did I know how much more The Age had concealed from its readers and, in concealing, made the claims of a

As for the Sunday Age smear piece four days later, the council noted it was written by a reporter, Michael Bachelard, whod already appeared before the Victorian Ombudsman about another piece in which hed accused Theophanous of grubby behaviour in this case, of trying to help a mate get a government cleaning contract. What the Press Council failed to add was that the Ombudsman had Bachelard conceding hed

to call herself a friend chose to believe.

This was the woman whose wild and career murdering allegations were plastered all over The Age, which hid inconsistencies that could have made readers suspect the truth. And so fell Theophanous, his long and distinguished career ruined by the pointing finger of an anonymous accuser of no credibility.

muddled his facts probably somewhere in the murky depths of my mind (I) put two and two together and concluded there was no evidence to support the allegation that Minister Theophanous attempted to influence the letting of any contract.

He told her she also had to change her claim that shed rung a girlfriend after the rape, since her phone records showed shed rung a former boyfriend instead.

So what should we learn? First, this tyranny of the pointing finger must be resisted.

BUT here Bachelard was, again blackening Theophanouss name, and again airing a false allegation. How false? A year later Magistrate Peter Reardon threw out the case against Theophanous at the committal stage, ruling Helen was a completely unreliable witness and no jury could convict on the evidence.

And could she explain having been found guilty in 1994 of making a false statement in claiming social security? How about an excuse for having falsely accused a former boss of sexual harassment? Asked in court why hed been so credulous, the detective said: Its incumbent on us to believe what complainants tell us It is?

Second, we should be slower to grant anonymity to those making devastating allegations against public figures with no such protection from being named, shamed and finished. Third, we should remember that the plural of rumour is not evidence.

Fourth, we must defy the modern convention that some allegations are so sacred that its a sin to question. These most notably include allegations of rape, racism and global warming. And, lastly, we should never forget that every journalist has an agenda. Its just that some do not declare them when it matters most.

No wonder. The court had heard that the Sexual Crimes Squad detective who took Helens statement took 15 months and an extraordinary 15 drafts to try to knock it into some plausible shape.

Other bits of Helens evidence crumbled in court at a slight touch.

He kept finding inconsistencies, you see. For example, he had to ask Helen to change the date of her alleged rape from June or July of 2000 to October of 1998.

A boyfriend whod dumped her for being abusive was shocked when he learned shed just told the court shed dumped him instead, claiming shed caught him masturbating over child porn. Other former friends described her as a liar, fantasist or forger.

Five lessons, and its Theophanous who has paid with his career and his name for them having been forgotten. Still, look on the bright side. At least the Age reporters Bachelard and Webb still have their jobs.

This was the woman who an Age reporter allegedly with an observant eye, and close enough

Men Devalued in Suicide Strategy


by: Hans Laven menz.org.nz *Not associated with this magazine

Many people will have heard mention of the NZ Suicide Prevention Strategy but wont be aware of exactly what it says, or that it was produced by the Ministry of Health and funded by our taxes. The Strategy was published in 2006 and is intended to be in place until 2016. We all know that men suicide on average at about three times the rate that women do (actually, for some age groups its five to six times as much, and the figures will not include many other suicides mistakenly classed otherwise).

and bisexual suicide, and migrant and refugee suicide, but not one devoted to mens suicide.

Whoever wrote the Strategy appeared keen to ensure that no special recognition be given to men. Although mention is made that men suicide at about three times the rate of women, this is downplayed or its effect minimized through placement among other statements. For example:
It is evident in our data for suicide and hospitalisation for suicide attempt that some groups of New Zealanders do better than others. For example, young Mori men have higher rates of suicide than nonMori men of the same age, Mori females have the highest rates of hospitalisation for suicide attempts, men die by suicide at approximately three times the rate of women, women are hospitalised for suicide attempts at approximately one and a half times the rate of men, and the most deprived geographic areas of New Zealand have much higher rates of suicide compared with the least deprived areas.

the fact that normal male responses to stress and threat have been painted as undesirable and in many cases made illegal).

No other population factor (e.g. age, race, socioeconomic status) shows the large effect that gender does regarding risk of suicide (except for children under 10 years old who are understandably many times less likely to suicide than are all older age groups). But surprise, surprise, the Strategy contains not one single component specifically aimed at reducing male suicide or addressing the factors that lead men to suicide. Almost every one of the Strategys seven goals contains a plan specifically related to reducing or managing Maori suicide, even though Maori to nonMaori suicide ratio (about 1.5) is much less than the male to female suicide ratio (3+).

The section then tries to cast doubt on any link between gender and suicidality at all because women are said to be more prone to suicidal behaviour and to make more attempts. The choice of method is then put forward as the key gender difference, as though this has nothing to do with actual suicidality. The section then claims that the gender difference in deaths by suicide is reducing, so really, lets just pretend gender isnt important at all. Dont believe me? Heres the section:
Males die by suicide at a higher rate than females (see Figure 9). These findings have led to a number of speculations about the reasons for this. There have been suggestions that males may have a greater tendency to suicide than females because of gender differences in the prevalence of mental health problems (including schizophrenia, drug and alcohol abuse, externalizing behaviours and propensity to violence), cultural acceptability of male (as opposed to female) suicide, and psychosocial differences (including the protective role of children for females and male reluctance to seek help for emotional problems). These arguments linking gender with suicidality may be without foundation. In particular, studies in New Zealand and around the world have consistently shown that females are more prone to suicidal behaviour and make more suicide attempts than males. The explanation for the higher rate of death by suicide for males

32

There are ten section headings in the Strategy report referring specifically to Maori suicide matters but exactly zero section headings specifically addressing mens suicide matters. There are also sections devoted to Pacific suicide, Asian suicide, gay, lesbian

The section headed Issues Relating to Gender is incredible. Acknowledgement is made of higher suicide by men but the section then seeks to make it a nonissue. Firstly, it dismisses various explanations that had been suggested for high male suicide (though no mention was made of other realistic explanations such as the extent to which men, their roles and contribution have been denigrated under feminist ideology, the damage our family law causes to fathers relationships with their children,

may not lie with genderrelated differences in tendencies to suicidal behaviour but, rather, with gender related differences in the choice of method used, with females more likely to use overdosing and males more likely to use firearms, carbon monoxide poisoning and hanging. Furthermore, there is evidence in New Zealand that gender differences in suicide rates are reducing. The male to female sex ratio reached a peak in 19901992 (4.2 male deaths for every female death), then decreased to a ratio of 3.2 male deaths for every female death in 20012003 (Ministry of Health in press). This decline was largely explained by an increasing rate of hanging in younger women. These considerations suggest that it would be misleading to represent suicide as a gender issue. Rather, policies need to recognise that suicidal behaviour is an important issue for both genders and is expressed in genderspecific ways, with women making more suicide attempts and males more often dying by suicide.

but not one specifically relevant to male issues or needs. In addition, the areas for action statements proposed under each of the seven goals also include references to suicide attempts as if these are just as important as successful suicides in a suicideprevention strategy, e.g:
promoting vigilance amongst families/whnau and friends of people who have made suicide attempts to limit access to means of suicide

But not one area for action specifically related to mens suicide was considered necessary, any need men might have being relegated to general statements about other population groups. How is it that men can be cast aside even in an area where they are without any doubt the most needy of any group?

and

supporting people who have lost someone close to them by suicide, or who are affected by a suicide attempt

The Maorispecific areas for action were:


increasing, where appropriate, the role of cultural development as a protective factor for Mori

Likely, the Clark government of the day instructed the Ministry of Health to prioritize women and Maori, and possibly to cover up the male need in case it alerted the population to the states exploitation and abuse of men that surely must contribute to their suicide rates. Perhaps men have just always been seen as disposable (sent to war etc) and the Strategy simply continued that social norm. Perhaps the actual writer(s) of the Strategy were rabid man haters. Who knows? We can only stand back and shake our heads in wonder. But what is clear is that NZs Suicide Prevention Strategy sees men being not as deserving as other people to be saved from suicide, and has little interest in the underlying reasons that men feel so worthless as to kill themselves in such large numbers.

increasing awareness and application of Mori models of health. establishing partnerships with hap, iwi, Mori providers and communities to assist mainstream services in their responsiveness to Mori. promoting and supporting research to expand the evidence base for Mori suicide prevention

In avoiding any special consideration for men (even though they are the most atrisk group for suicide), the Strategys logic twists and turns in order to place greater priority on women.

It initially defines suicide not as suicide but also as attempted suicide, any selfharm and any thoughts about suicide, essentially treating womens frequent suicidal gestures and even such things as selfcutting as equally important to mens real suicide. The seven goals invented in the Strategy include one mainly relevant to women
3. improve the care of people who make nonfatal suicide attempts

How we Kill Johnny


by: Paul Elam

avoiceformen.com

It was three weeks after I left the last residential treatment center for which I would ever work. A Saturday morning to be precise, and the phone rang jarring me from the rare pleasure of a sleep in. It was Camille, so I knew it wasnt good. She wouldnt call me if it were good.

telling them how full of crap she was. We were the only two counselors in that program and the mix was volatile. I spent many days in the administrative offices fending off complaints about my unusual style in dealing with male clients. That is what they called not hating them. Johnny wasnt the first in twenty years of doing that kind of work. Quite honestly, I had lost count. But counting is just for statistics anyway. In the work I did the numbers had faces. They had families and stories that I learned from listening to them. And they had pain that mostly went unnoticed by the very people that were supposed to be there to help them. I remembered Johnnys story, and his pain. He was a twenty two year old stock boy at an auto parts store in the hot and humid swamp lands of southern Louisiana. When he spoke, it was with rural earnestness, and a Cajun accent thicker than gators in bayou country. Man, Paul, I doan know what to do bout that girl o mine. I know she cheatin. I know I doan make a dime what she dont spend right away. Sometime she spend it on some other guy. But I cant help it. Every time she call my name I got to come runnin. Lord never made a bigger fool than me.

And Johnny was right. He was a fool, and couldnt be talked out of his foolishness. Just like all real men. And his story isnt reserved just for those who drink and drug themselves into oblivion because they have a woman they cant live with, or without.

Your remember that boy Johnny you worked with, the one from Louisiana? she asked. Yeah, why? Dead, she said. It was uttered in the tone of someone doing a poor job acting like they didnt like delivering bad news. Drugs? I asked. No, she replied, Suicide. Killed that little girl he was married to, as well. And shot some guy she was sleepin with, but he made it. I just lay there silent. Anyway, I knew you would want to know.

Example of an Antimale advertisement

In this awful age of misandry, we live so many lies about men that we have lost all touch with the reality of what they are really like. And the cost of it is written in caskets and countless souls lost in a world with no memory of why they died.

I hung up without saying anything else. Knew I would want to know? My ass. Couldnt wait to tell me was more like it. The woman was a feminist crusader, on wheels. She made a career of telling the men we counseled what louts they were for being men, and I made a career of pulling them aside and

You see, men love. They love with the most profound intensity and selflessness of which any creature on this earth is capable. And the steely bond between them and women is, unlike their hearts, unbreakable. When men die on the battlefield, they often fade away telling fellow soldiers Tell my wife I love her. Others cry out for their their mothers as blood soaks the soil. They are flattened by divorce, and

34

many will eat a gun rather than face the loss, even if it is the loss of someone that has already destroyed their lives.

They will lay down in traffic for the women they love and stand in the way of bullets to protect them. And they will strike down any who dares offend them. They have been doing this for all of human history.

posing all the wrong problems. We have a president who marks Fathers Day by shaming men for not being better Dads. We have psychotherapists telling us that it is women who love too much. And we have a system of higher education that cares more about the life expectancy of a fruit fly than a young man who blows his brains out.

Yet all this has been rewritten with misandric ink. It is been revised by scholars who tell us men are bad, by psychologists whose main field of work seems to be recommending divorce, complete with male scapegoat, as a cure all for women for whatever petty dissatisfactions they feel about their mates. And it has been inculcated into the consciousness of our family law system, driving men to despair and despondency on levels never before seen in history.

the character and integrity to be trusted, from the start. And we need to teach them how rare that is in modern life. More than anything else, we need to teach them how to let women go, and watch them as they grow up to make sure they can do it. And we need Dads to role model that, in their own families with their own wives. In other words, we need to do a lot of things that we are not doing.

Example of an Antimale advertisement

If you want the statistics, go look them up. I am tired of turning dead men into numbers and proving there is a problem to the Camilles of this world.

And this in a culture that still raises men to put women in lifeboats and then try their hand at breathing saltwater, as though death were their only true calling. Is it any wonder why, when we create men to so devalue their own existence; to be disposable, that we can so often see them doing just what we have insisted that they do? And shouldnt we, perhaps, question at times whether it is suicide that takes these men or murder? Who, after all, is putting the gun in their hands and promising them the pain will stop if they only pull the trigger? Perhaps Obama, in his own erroneous way, is right. We do need better Dads.

I know it is obligatory. I cant write a piece like this and not include some resources for men to call in in times of crisis, such as those paltry resources are. So I will include something at the end. But I would still like to think, that somewhere, at some point in time, we can quit offering Bandaids for men to put on tumors and start helping them with their real problems. It seems, hell or high water, that we are going to continue to destroy men in courtrooms and therapy offices and offer them up as convenient political fodder. It isnt anything new. But we better start calling on the fathers of this world to stop raising their sons to do nothing more than stand against a wall for whatever woman is in their lives, just waiting for their turn in a box. National Suicide Prevention Hotline:1800273TALK (Canada)1800SUICIDE

I hope, more than anything else, that at some point in our future that people start to think. When you see the story on the evening news about a man who set himself ablaze outside a family court, ask yourself what kind of pain could drive someone to cure it with fire? When you read in the newspaper about the man who holed up in his house with a gun and his children, threatening to take them all out, ask yourself if this is just a crazy man, or a man driven to the brink by a pain so monstrous and devastating that even the unthinkable could become an option? Indeed, there is a great deal we have to ask. The only problem is that all the wrong people are

We need Dads to teach their sons, not how to treat a woman, but how hold their own with them. We dont need to teach them to take care of their woman, but to only accept one who demonstrates

Paul Elam is the Editorin Chief for Mens News Daily and the Publisher of A Voice for Men

A reading from the Book of Zed:

Interaction of Men and Women, an Overview.

As the 20th century draws to a close, it is hard to imagine a time when relationships between men and women have ever been worse. Sandy Close, writing for the Pacific News Service, quotes a veteran teacher in her article, "Gender War Among Youth At the Heart of America's Calamity", that among young people today "Malefemale relations these days aren't lovehate. They're pure hate."

ith all the thousands of books published on the topic of relationships, trying to say something meaningful, and hopefully new, about the topic in the context of the gender war seems nearly impossible. And trying to say it briefly or concisely or succinctly seems even more impossible. However, it is even still more impossible to sit idly by and say or do nothing.

Like World War I, which the naively optimistic called "The War to End ALL Wars," the gender war has become a trench war with the various sides dug in and surrounded by barbed wire. And, like that war, the frontier has moved very little in the past few years. (During the entire First World War, the frontier never advanced or retreated more than 7 miles.) But, unlike that war, this one has dragged on for 35 years. Two generations have been born, grown up, gone to college, and entered the cold hard world of adulthood while the war has dragged on. One almost has to wonder whether this gender war is going to become the "Hundred Years Gender War."

Like the American Civil War, and I suppose really like ALL civil wars, this one is tearing apart families, turning former friends and allies (like spouses) into bitter enemies, consuming a huge portion of the available resources, time, and energy of the citizens, and leaving nothing but bitter destruction and scorched earth in its wake. Marriages are more likely to fail than to succeed. Both sexes are talking about "reproductive independence" from the other. Young people of both sexes hate the other sex.

This isn't about equality. Equality has nothing whatsoever to do with it. Equality never has had anything to do with it.

It is about the intrusion of marketplace values into personal relationships, the purchase of love, and the devastating effects of inflation as the "price of love" has spiraled upward out of control. It

36

is about how sex, love, and people have been turned into commodities and objects. And it is about the clash between socialism and capitalism in the realm of personal relationships. And it is about hate. It is about a small group of mentally and emotionally ill women who have been able to sell their personal hatefilled pathology as a universal cultural condition. It is about making women fear and distrust men and men fear and distrust women, more than they already had reason to. It is about denial of real biological differences which do exist, at the same time it is about denial of the real nature of those differences. It is about turning wouldbe allies into enemies, and majoring in minors to turn petty differences into war. It is about a bunch of disgruntled wouldbe princesses throwing a fit because life isn't carrying them around on a satin pillow. And it is about men getting sick of dying and being sacrificed for trying to satisfy the aspiring princesses that these men are trying to love.

It is about distorting the entirety of human history which was not particularly kind to anyone, and was full of challenges to survival, and painting the strategies used to insure the survival of the greatest number of people in the revisionist light of victimism. It is about insanity being sold as sanity. It IS insanity. In the end, the future will boil down to the answers to two questions:

1) Just how much hate do women expect to be able to dump on men without men beginning to hate back bitterly?

2) Are there enough women willing to stop hating, and start cooperating with men and taking a realistic look at the actions of women and how they directly contribute to the creation and perpetuation of the complaints of feminism, to turn back the tide of hate and make a difference? You tell me.

It doesn't have to end like this...

Suicide is the second or third (depending on age) leading cause of death for men under the age of 65 - a rate between 4 to 9 times the rate for women. Suicide kills more men aged 15 - 44 than Cancer, Stroke, and Diabetes

Combined!

This is not "normal" in any sense of the word. Suicide rates for men have risen sharply in the last 5 decades, from almost parity with women in 1960 to the glaring crisis among men we have today. Please, contact your MP / Congressmen - ask them why they don't care about men and boys.

Recommended Reading:

Men's Issues Websites:


www.mensnewsdaily.com www.glennsacks.com www.standyourground.com www.mensactivism.org www.angryharry.com www.thespearhead.com www.avoiceformen.com www.mediaradar.org falserapesociety.blogspot.com counterfem.blogspot.com antimisandry.com

PUA: Pick Up Artist good with women, usually a practictioner of Game in one form or another.

Terms and Definitions:

Game: Practical understanding of the base natures of women, and what they respond to. MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way men who have decided women aren't worth the trouble. MRM: Mens Rights Movement MRA: Mens Rights Activist

Men today face more obstacles and barriers than ever before. Men face diminished employment prospects, barriers to obtaining a quality education, even demonization of their very masculinity. Socially, men as a group occupy increasingly devalued positions. The destruction of the 'Traditional' male role, along with the removal of the Father from the family, has led to generations of men with little guidance, save the voices of those who hate them. The everpresent media neither represents their views, nor does it even accurately portray them. Rather than being seen as half of society, men are increasingly portrayed as occupations, or archetypes, their humanity carefully hidden from view. For decades, men were forced to keep quiet. For decades, men thought they, and they alone, 'felt that way'. But no more. With MenZ Magazine, you will be exposed to ideas and arguments you will assuredly never hear on your television, or read in your local paper. These are the views of men, and women, who are tired of being spoon fed misinformation. People who want YOU to know that you, as a man, matter. So please, join us.
menzmagazine.blogspot.com

You might also like