A criticism from a feminist and some of the themes that it brought up – with remarks about low self-esteem and low self-respect

The other day I received a criticism from a feminist.  It was a reaction to my article “More thoughts on that destructive philosophy called feminism – my overall impression after almost three decades of observation”.

The response is very typical of a feminist.  It deals with predictable themes and predictable statements.  Much of what she said I was hearing in the 1970’s.  In fact, it had the quality of a “flash from the past” for me.  As a result, it’s a good example of common ‘run-of-the-mill’ feminist thinking.  Nothing she said revealed any ‘personal’ opinion that I could determine.  What she said was what many feminists say and which I have heard, in various versions, for decades.  But, because I have no intention of making ‘personal insults’ in this (which would defeat the purpose of writing this) I will try to paraphrase what she said for the sake of anymosity, as I am in no way criticizing her, as a person.  There are parts, though, that are just so revealing that I must quote it word for word.


I’ve written a lot on feminism and have been very disapointed that I’ve received little criticism.  The reason why is that it is from their responses that you learn a lot about how they REALLY think, as this criticism shows.   I’ve found that by talking to them and hearing what they actually say, and what they actually claim, reveals more than their ‘official’ explanations.  It opened up a whole new perspective on this philosophy and revealed what it was really all about.  Hearing their critical remarks, particularly in regard to a downplaying or condemning of their philosophy, can be VERY revealing.  One of the reason for this is because, at the root of this problem, is a crisis.  Behind all their talk and fancy explanations you actually have an insecure person.  This insecurity, and crisis, is often brought out when their main defense against this problem – feminism – is challenged.  I’ve seen quite a few feminists explode, literally, over the most trivial of things.  This fact shows that there is great insecurity behind it all, a theme that continually keeps reappearing with these people, again and again and again.

I should also point out that when I began to first question this problem, in the 1980’s, I was studying to be a Psychoanalyst or a Psychologist.  As a result, it was looked at from that perspective, as a person looking into human nature and its conflicts.  Though many of these girls would like to think I am ‘degrading’ them (as it would justify their philosophy), this is not true.  Then, and now, I look at it seriously, as reflecting a human problem.  I did not then, nor now, seek to blatanly condemn them nor am I belittling the female.  In fact, I think that anyone with a mind can see that my concern over this shows a love, caring, and respect for the femalehood.  I can see that they are having problems.  In fact, even after all these years I can see that feminism hides a crisis in the femalehood of the modern world, of females uncertain of who they are and who have developed low views of themselves as a result.  This became apparent to me by the late 1980’s.  It still appears that way now.  In fact, its gotten worse.  Feminism is where girls with these problems “hide”, so to speak, and “protect” themselves from their crisis. 

When I first read this criticism I was stunned. 


Because it was what TOO MUCH what I expected.  One of the ways I learn about certain ‘mentalities’ is that I try to see if I can ‘predict’ what they’re going to say.  Often, when I write something (such as on democracy or feminism) I will try to ‘predict’ how they would criticize what I wrote and the themes they might bring up.  This girl hit quite a few things ‘right on’, exactly as expected.   

This is because I’ve found that feminism is often very predictable.  What makes it tricky are the different types as, you might want to say, there are different ‘schools of thought’.  Sometimes, these different ‘schools of thought’ will contradict each other and fight with each other (I know, I’ve seen it!).  But, knowing these different ways of thinking, you can often ‘guess’ things.  Often, after knowing a particualar feminist and her ‘school of thought’, I can often get to the point of ‘predicting’ what she’s going to say, how she will react to a situation, and such.  This is because feminism is a very narrow conception of things.  Frankly, its not a broad viewpoint, only dealing with a certain aspect of things . . . and only from a certain perspective.  Not only that, most feminists (particularly the ‘die hards’) will try to make these narrow conception everything.  This makes it even more narrow.  This is because they are taking an already narrow conception and are trying to ‘force it’ into the wider reality of life.  That just makes it even appear more smaller.  In some cases, they tried to make it such a big thing that I thought they were going to turn it into a religion or something.  I once joked, in the 1980’s, how they should start a ‘Church of Women’.  You can walk into the church and there, above the altar, they can have a big huge sign, from one wall to the other, that says “WOMAN”.  There, you can see all the feminists bowing down to it.  They could then have sermons on how great and ‘superior’ the woman is.  And, lets not forget, they need to preach hatred of the male, as we’re the mean evil tyrants who caused all their problems.  Believe me, I almost thought that was going to happen too!

Sadly, feminism was often so predictable that there were a few times where I would say things to feminists just to watch them explode or see them get mad.  It was that easy!  It was too easy . . . that was the problem.  To be frank, it was actually hilarious.  I wish I had film of it.  I used to joke about how, in a show called “Young Frankenstein”, one of the actors would say “Blucher” (I think it was) and the horses would go wild.  I’d joke that you can do that with a feminist.  All you had to do is say “female” and they’d erupt or, better yet, say “females cook and clean”.  Their faces would go red and steam would come out of their ears and then . . . that look . . . like the world was going to come to an end.  I then might hear of how I’m a sexist or chauvinist pig or maybe have the Constititution quoted to me in fierce tones.  It was comical.  That’s sort of sad and its definately pathetic.  But, it was the fact that I could do this that put the feminist in great doubt.  That is TOO TOUCHY.  The fact that I did this also shows that I had lost respect for them, as I was, in a way, ‘toying’ with them.  It shows that, at that point of my life (which was the latter point of college) they had became a bunch of uptight wound-up insecure neurotic people to me.  I no longer believed their nonsense of how bad we guys are and how they’ve been abused since the beginning of time.  I think I had had enough by that time and my ‘toying’ with them showed it.


I’ve seen too many feminists explode over saying something as simple and basic as “females cook and clean”.  When I first saw that I was stunned.  At first, this didn’t make any sense to me, as I saw my mom and my friends mom cook and clean all my life.  It, to me, was a part of life.  What’s so friggin’ bad about it?  I told one female (it seems that this was in the late 1970’s) that it didn’t make any sense to me as we guys have to go to work and come home and fix the plumbing or the lawn mower.  I got a lecture on how it was all degradation and slavery.  So its degradation and slavery for them (of course, we’re the bad guys)  and the fact that guys have to go to a job they don’t enjoy, for a barely survivable wage, and come home to become the ‘handy man’, apparenlty, doesn’t mean anything.  That’s ridiculous.

Its this type of absurdity that permeates the whole philosophy.


–  She first mentions that what I wrote was a joke.  Yeah, I know.  I’ve heard it already . . . been hearing it for 30 or so years.  Of course they’re going to sat that.  I would be disappointed if they didn’t.  I’ve learned that, for most feminists, if you aren’t for feminism, then you’re against it.  Never have I seen any criticism of feminism NOT get a reaction and a criticism.  It’s like feminism is some holy relic that us guys can’t touch and which is sacriligious to say anything bad about it.  As I said above, feminism is a ‘defense’ against an inner crisis.  As a result, when this ‘defense’ is threatened in any way they become ‘vulnerable’ and must act defensively.  Typically, they must do something to protect themselves, often going through great lengths to do it.  Sometimes, this reaction can become quite violent too.   This is something that I’ve learned to expect from them.  In fact, if I don’t see it I question it.  Why?  Because the whole feminist ‘thing’ is based in a feeling of being ‘threatened’ by a ‘crisis’.  That’s what gives it its special quality.  If a female does not feel ‘vulnerable’, requiring her to defend herself, then it often means that I am not dealing with a ‘real’ feminist with the ‘feminist crisis’. 

I’ve confronted this before.  I have seen girls who were interested in the “intellectual” aspects of feminism only.  In 30 or so years I could count them on one hand though.  Usually, they only liked certain principles that were stated and that was the end of their association with it. 

I had a conversation with an older lady (she was in her 50’s, I think) who was one of these.  What she said was quite revealing.  I can’t recall, word for word, what she said, but I’ll try to state the ‘gist’ of what she said:

“What these young girls, nowadays, call feminism is not feminism.  It’s something else.  I’ll never forget when the early 70’s came.  These girls, calling themselves feminists, acted more like religious fanatics.  They turned the feminism into a fanatical frenzy and made these absurd claims.  I was particularly appaled by how they blamed the man for everything.  Many were nothing but a bunch of man-haters, intent on attacking the man in any way they can.  They were probably a bunch of girls who couldn’t get layed [I was surprised to hear an older lady say that].  They blamed the man for everything.  This is not what feminism is about that!  It’s not about blaming people, no less the man.  They should be wanting to live with the man and to develop a relationship with the man.  With what these girls were saying there’s no way they could live with a man.  If I was a man I wouldn’t want anything to do with them.  They had absolutely no appreciation, whatsoever, of what the man has done for us.  What these girls did, really, is destroy feminism.  They destroyed it with their fanatism and their stupid claims.  They completely lost sight of what its all about.”

She makes a few points that I’ve never heard a female, no less a feminist, make:

  1. That in the early 1970’s the females, themselves, turned feminism into a fanatical frenzy.
  2. That they turned it into something that went beyond the political “message” and, in so doing, lost sight of what it really meant.
  3. That they made it ‘personal’ and she hinted how they turned feminism into nothing but an avenue for girls to ‘vent’ their personal problems (such as being man-haters). 
  4. She acknowladged the importance of the man and that they need to live with men.  This is something I’ve never seen a feminist do.  In the criticism below you’ll see how this girl mocked the fact that I had mentioned that we guys did things for girls.

–  She mentions how I wrote about common misconceptions of feminism.  Yeah, I know.  I’ve heard it already . . . for about 30 years.  I’m a guy . . . I don’t know crap.  This is another normal response.  As with the above, its a defense, and a good sign, as it means I’m probably dealing with a real ‘feminist’.  I’ve even heard some feminists claim that ALL of what we think is wrong.  Many feminists defend themselves from the male by building a wall of “you’ll never know or  understand cause your a guy”.  This wall is generally so tall and thick that it will be impossible to surmount it.  A conversation with a girl that does this will be like talking to a ‘wall’.  Its best to end the conversation at that point.

–  She makes mention how of I was basically implying that females are SUPPOSED TO, and I’ll quote, “wear dresses in order to be attractive to men, cook for their husbands, be full-time mothers”.  This is a very important point as I NEVER SAID ANY OF THAT!  Its very important to remember that THIS ALL CAME FROM HER MOUTH, NOT MINE.  What this means is that IT REFLECTS HER POINT OF VIEW.  And what does it reveal?  It reveals a low opinion of the female by the feminist herself.  The problem is not my view of the female, but theirs!  It shows what I often describe as the self-destructive quality in feminism, where THEY degrade the female, where THEY make being a female out as a bad thing, where THEY turn the female into a victim and a slave.   

Then, once they reveal their low self-image, they PROJECT it onto the male, making it out as if we are the ones who are doing it and blame us for it.  We are then transformed into these horrible monsters and can be portrayed as tyranical oppressors and slavemasters.  This is a common feminist ‘trick’.  So we see a pattern:

  1. The female feels a low self-esteem, low self-image, and a poor image of the female in general. 
  2. They then create this image, in their minds, of how the female is a victim, a slave, or oppressed in some way.
  3. They then take that image, with all its bad feelings, and project it onto the male.  We then take the ‘brunt’ of their low self-image and are blamed for it and their problems.

I was often stunned by some of the images that feminists created of the male.  I was so stunned by this that, in the late 1980’s, I asked several feminists what PROOF they had that we guys were like this.  Not one gave any proof at all!  In other words, they could not show that ANY MALE THEY KNEW was a tyrannical oppressive slavemasterWhat they based their whole viewpoint on was FEMINIST HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONAfter talking with one girl for a while I recall her admitting to me that she saw nothing like that in the male at all and that, in her life, the male was a very good person.  I told her, if I recall right, that she should get out of this philosophy because that’s what this philosophy preaches.  I think she did leave it.

– She then makes mention of how she, apparently, assumed that I had no “engagement” with the people I “angrily condemn”.  By “engagement” I think she means some form of a ‘real’ association.  Let me first point out that I couldn’t of written all this without any “engagement” with them.  What do you think I did, sit in my arm chair and dream it all up?  My first reaction is that she’s saying that I don’t know what I’m saying because I have no “engagement” with them . . . an easy way to try to discount me.  In a way, she’s making it more ‘personal’, saying that I don’t ‘personally know’ them.

Her statement, though, has a similarity to a theme I often see with feminism that’s interesting.   It reminds me of something I used to see a lot in the 1980’s and 1990’s.  I called it “Playing Ms. Maturity”.  It seemed like, every other day, I’d hear feminists claiming how ‘mature’ they are and that we guys are ‘little boys’.  In fact, it got to the point that it was sort of insulting.  You’d have these girls hovering over you with this delusion of how they are so much more mature than we are, treating us guys like children.  They had this notion that they were somehow more ‘in-tune’ with life than we were.  They talked as if they were the only ones, for example, who knew how to have relationships.  In fact, I’d hear many feminists say that we guys don’t know how to have a relationship.  I was stunned to hear quite a few girls say that we were INCAPABLE of a relationship.  I’ve always wondered about this as, if we are so incapable of a relationship, then who do the girls have a relationship with?  Many girls would become like the ‘self-proclaimed’ expert on relationships, as if they are the only ones who knew anything about it.  I recall discussing relationships with a number of these girls.  This was the time, remember, that I was studying to be a Psychologist.  I’d ask them questions about relationships, what it consisted of, etc.  You know what I found?  They really didn’t know.  They just thought they knew.  When they talked of relationships it was “idealistic”, not based on “real world” experience, but more of an “imagined” relationship.  I actually found that feminists actually had more “imagined” viewpoints of relationships than “dreamy” girls did (who were waiting for Prince Charming).  But their thinking they were experts made them feel they had some ‘control’ on it. 

I’ve found that this tendency seemed to show a sense of inferiority in relationships.  In other words, relationships make them feel inferior.  This is not because the relationship, itself, made them feel inferior but, as individual people, they felt inferior deep down insideThe emphasis on relationships – other people – seems to show the same tendency I described above, of projecting personal conflicts onto other people.  And so we see this pattern:

inner feelings of inferiority>>>projection>>>relationships make them feel inferior

But their feelings of inferiority still haunt them so they try to ‘rise above’ the inferiority by becoming the ‘experts’ of relationships.  But that’s still doesn’t get rid of it so they take the next step:  they ‘rise above’ the other person in relationships.  Hence, they become ‘Ms. Mature’, superior to the ‘infantile male’.  So we see this pattern:

feel inferior in relationships>>>try to ‘rise above’ inferiority by becoming an expert at relationships>>>still feel inferior>>>they ‘rise above’ the other person in relationships and become ‘Ms. Mature’>>>they have become superior and don’t feel inferior any more

We must remember that this is nothing but an attempt at combating feelings of inferiority!

This kind of stuff is not new with feminists.  Many feminists, I’ve found, battle feelings of inferiority.  A common way they deal with it is by trying to be ‘above’ the male (that is to say, ‘superior’ to him).  Much of their logic and behavour revolves around this very thing.  Many will try to ‘outman’ guys, try to compete with them, etc.  And, a lot of times, these hide attempts and getting rid of feelings of inferiority

There is even a ‘school of thought’ of feminism that focuses on the ‘superiority’ of females, preaching how ‘superior’ they are.  These types of feminists, I’ve found, seem to have the deepest problems.  They seem to be the most ‘neurotic’ with many ‘personal issues’.  Is it any wonder?  Feelings of inferiority shows that we’re dealing with deep personal problems.

And what is this “angrily condemns” she mentions?  Where did I angrily condemn them?  Did I express anger?  Did I condemn them?   I’d say that there are more better expressions to describe my reaction to feminists:

  • They disgust me.
  • They frustrate me.
  • They appal me.
  • I feel a contempt for them.
  • I feel a lack of respect for them.
  • They are ridiculous.
  • They are unbelievable.
  • They are nonsensical.
  • They are pathetic.
  • They, sometimes, are even comical, having an appearance of a clown.
  • I fell upset with them.
  • I feel, frankly, let down by them.
  • I feel insulted by them.
  • I feel offended.

Is it any wonder someone would feel feelings like these? 

What do you expect? 

What do you expect when people sit and tell you that you are responsible for enslaving them since the beginning of time?  What do you expect when people continuously accuse you of things you didn’t do?  What do you expect when people make out everything you do as degrading to them?  What do you expect when you show them kindness and they call you a name in return?  What do you expect when I got to walk on tippy-toes around these people for fear I might violate their precious rights?  And so on and so forth.


–  She mentions how I spoke of how the male did many things for girls.  I get the impression that she was ‘bothered’ by my mentioning how guys open doors for them.  She then turned this into some form of abuse against the female (just like a good feminist would do).  She also mentioned that she was bothered when I mentioned ‘spoiled brat’.  What she said next is so good that I will just quote what she said:  “women should go about their business looking pretty whilst their husbands tirelessly open doors for them as of course they are not able to do so for themselves. Oh what a bore that I am made to feel like a precious little doll who cannot do anything for herself let alone think for herself!”  Again, where did that come from?  I DIDN’T SAY THAT . . . SHE SAID THAT.  This reveals, again, how SHE perceives the female, not me.  And, again, we see the low self-image and, again, we see the projection, claiming that I said it.  This is another example of how, at the heart of a lot of feminism, is a low opinion of oneself and what one is.  This is a good example of how many feminists have problems with their identity, of who they are, and how they are supposed to be in the world. 

But listen carefully to what she said:  “. . . I am made to feel like a precious little doll who cannot do anything for herself let alone think for herself”.

Think about it!

I said that?  Where did I say that?  Where did “I” make her feel like a “precious little doll”?  Where did “I” say she cannot do things for herself?  Where did “I” say that she can’t think for herself?

That is classic feminism here: . . . claims and accusations coming from nowhere!

But it didn’t come from nowhere.  It came from somewhere:  it came from within her.  This is HER speaking about how SHE feels about HERSELF through ME. 

And then there’s the nonsense about how I mentioned how guys did things for girls such as protecting them and opening doors for them.  I mentioned the “opening of doors”, by the way, as a reference to the EVERYDAY DISPLAY OF COURTESY AND RESPECT WE GUYS SHOW GIRLS AND HOW WE DISPLAY IT IN LITTLE EVERYDAY EVENTS, such as opening a door.  You’d never see a girl do that for us, no less a feminist!  How feminists make such a big deal about this is so UNBELIEVABLE to me and fills me with the UTMOST CONTEMPT. 

My first confrontation with this mentality was in about 1977.  I was in grade school.  One day we went out for recess.  I decided, OUT OF COURTESY AND RESPECT, to open a door for a female.  What did I get?  I got yelled at and told I was a ‘Male Chauvinist Pig’!

I remember being devastated by this. I remember being bewildered and at a loss as to what this was supposed to mean.  What is a ‘male chauvinist pig’ anyways?  I asked a number of people and, if I recall right, most people didn’t know what it meant.  It seems that one of the boys I had class with told me it meant a ‘guy who degrades the female’ or something to that effect. 

What?  I was trying to degrade the female?  What?  That didn’t make any sense to me at all.

Needless to say, I was apprehensive about opening a door for girl after that.  In fact, if my memory is correct, I did not open a door for a female again til I was in my early twenties – over 10 years later! 

And why did I do it?  What compelled me to start doing it?  A feeling of courtesy and respect – something feminists don’t know anything about! 

What’s also interesting about all this is that when I said that we guys treated girls so well I was only showing how the guys helped turn girls into a ‘brat’ by catering to them all the time.  But, whats interesting, is how she completely missed this point and turned it into a ‘we guys are degrading the female by being nice to them’.  She took the fact of how we do things for them and turned into into some terrible thing.  This type of logic is common among feminists. 

If you do things for these people they not only get upset about it but they make it out as if you’re trying to harm them in some way

What kind of person takes a nice gesture from someone and SEE’S some horrible act, such as that we are trying to degrade them?  What do you think that says about that person?  What do you think that reveals? 

I know:  low self-esteem, low self-respect, and an inner insecurity . . . the continual themes I confront with feminists. 

But what else does this behaviour show?  It shows an UNGRATEFULLNESS and a LACK OF APPRECIATION.  What are these traits of? . . . a ‘brat’.  Don’t we say “ungrateful brat”? 

I find it interesting how this girl mentioned that she was bothered by my mentioning ‘spoiled brat’ and, in the same breath practically, criticized me for ‘opening doors’ But I guess its no wonder as they are related:  being ungrateful for someone opening the door for you is what ungrateful brats do!  In reality, she confirmed what I said, that there is a ‘brat’ behind a lot of feminist thinking.

Not only that, this describes an INTERPERSONAL PROBLEM, of problems in associating with people, which many of them have, by the way.  What do you think?  Do you think that this point of view is going to lead to healthy productive interpersonal relationships?  How can you have a healthy productive relationship with someone who see’s kind acts from you as some form of “attempt” at degrading them? 

It’s simple:  you can’t.  This is a good example of how feminism is a fight that no one can win.  No matter what we do, they are unhappy.  There’s always something wrong with what we do. 

But are we the problem, as they claim?  Are we guys at fault for their being that way?

No.  It’s the females themselves that at fault.  It comes from within them.  It does not lie within the male, nor does it have anything to do with the male, nor is it a male problem. 

This is a female problem!

But they claim that WE are degrading them?

Think about it!

Who’s degrading who? 

I DON’T RECALL ANY DEGRADATION, OR HINT OF DEGRADATION, IN ANYTHING I SAID, NOR WAS ANY IMPLIED.  And how, exactly, does showing someone courtesy a form of degradation?  The reality is that COURTESY TO PEOPLE IS USUALLY A SIGN OF RESPECT!  This is something feminists seem to miss in their campaign of promoting their low self-image. 

But, it seems that everytime I deal with a feminist the theme of degradation seems to ‘plop’ in somewhere, like some curse that won’t go away.  With feminists you’ll notice that the theme of degradation is almost everywhere in their logic.  They see it in actions, in roles, in words, in their interpretations of things, in just about everything under the sun.  The fact that it is so prevalent in their logic shows that they are the ones struggling with this feeling.  It reveals how many feminists, themselves, are actually the ones degrading themselves.  In many ways, they are fighting their own feelings of self-degradation. 

–  With the remarks above she ends the criticism.  But if I were to put what she basically said, in the least amount of words, from a psychological point of view, it would be something like this:

“I’m having a poor self-image of myself but, through the ‘miracle of feminism’, I can blame you for it and get the illusion that I don’t have this problem”. 

That, to me, is the basic statement of feminism for most girls.  Its this ‘miracle of feminism’ that makes it so appealing to girls.  It gives them:

  • An explanation for their crisis.
  • A ‘bad guy’ to blame.
  • A way to justify their conflicts.
  • An illusion of escape from their crisis.

In the end, though, it does not help, in any way, with their crisis.  My observation is that it generally gets worse.  Because of this it gives feminism a quality of a ‘CULTURE OF CRISIS’, of a bunch of people who have turned their crisis into a ‘way of life’.


I mentioned, and demonstrated, themes that I continually see in feminism.  These seem to be endlessly recurring and permeates the whole philosophy.  They include:

  • Low self-esteem.
  • Low self-respect.  This tends to lead to lack of respect for others.
  • A low self-image and a poor portrayal of oneself.
  • Feelings of inferiority.
  • Identity problems.  Difficulty in the perception of oneself and what ones role is in the world.

And, with this, we see a consistent, and commonly used, defense against these problems:  Projection of these feelings onto other people. 

The feminists were able to take the principles of ‘freedom and democracy’ and fit it into their conflicts, giving feminism an appearance of justification and authority, which they have milked for all its worth.   Several themes of ‘freedom and democracy’ were used quite heavily:

  • The idea of ‘oppression’ – they portrayed themselves as ‘oppressed’.
  • The idea of ‘freedom’ – since they were ‘oppressed’, they were seeking ‘freedom’.

Using these, they were able to ‘dupe’ people into believing a lot of their claims (which, I don’t think, would normally of been accepted).  Its really no wonder that their greatest succes was during the cold war when ‘freedom and democracy’ were practically worshipped.  Few people were willing to refute it then.  In effect, then, they manipulated social conventions to get their way.  This is something to be remembered, and to be cautious about, as they do this quite extensively.

But, at the base of a lot of this is a basic female problem.  Very early on I began to notice a theme that was continually referred to by feminists.  In its simplist form it amounted to this:  that males had everything and females had nothing.  I noticed consistent complaints and moaning about this.  It was so dominant in their thinking that they saw it in everything, all the time, no matter where they went.  This gives it a quality of having obsessive tendencies.  The thing is . . . I’ve seen it before and have looked into it already. 

Basically, some girls develop what can be described as an ‘inferiority complex’.  They begin to think that they – meaning the female – are downtrodded people, tossed to the side by society, and treated like dogs.  There are many versions of this and it is commonly seen in many types of female neurosis. 

It often creates three patterns of reactions to it:

  1. Being ‘fixated’ on how horrible the female is.
  2. By blaming and accusing people, claiming that they, as if, ‘plotted’ to make them this way (like a paranoia).
  3. By trying to be a man.

All three of these reactions are seen quite extensively in feminism.

What does this mean?

It shows that feminism is reflecting this ‘inferiority complex’.  It is an avenue that has become a way for some girls to deal with this crisis.  I tend to feel that feminism probably had nothing to do with this conflict originally.  It appears that, over time, the newer generation of girls as if ‘injected’ this conflict into feminism, changing its form.  It seems that this happened in the post WWII-cold war era, beginning heavily in the 1970’s.  Ever since, it attracts girls with this conflict like a magnet.   Because of this, most modern feminists reflect this conflict in some way.  Its so prevalent that its turned feminism into nothing but a bunch of people with ‘issues’.  There’s a lot of us, both male and female, who know the truth of this!

But there are deeper sides to this ‘inferiority complex’.  It’s sort of hard to explain but I’ll try to explain it in the best way I can.

Many of these girls complain of being a ‘slave’.  Well, you know what?  They are. 

Females are slaves.  They are slaves to a master none of them can possibly defeat or have any control of.  They are reminded of this slavery every month in fact, for most of their lives.

I speak of . . . menstruation.

When I was studying psychology I became bewildered by certain reactions and problems of females.  It lead me into the “taboo” world of menstruation.  Believe me . . . it was taboo.  In fact, it got to the point that I never spoke to the females about the “M-word”.  I had to carry out my inquiry in silence, and without mention of the “M-word”. 

I was stunned how just mentioning it would fly some girls in a rage.  In fact, these rages were amazingly similar to the rage I saw with the feminists, such as when you tell them ‘females cook or clean’. 

That’s no mistake, as I found out.

I’d also get lectures on how I don’t know crap about it, no matter what I said about it.  I’m a guy remember, trodding on ‘forbidden’ territory. 

It didn’t take a genius to see that there was a lot of ‘tension’ here, and conflict. 

I should point out that most girls don’t have ‘menstrual problems’.  Most dealt with it, accepted it, and lived with it.  But I found that there were a small group of females who struggled with it, often to the point that it caused a neurosis or some other mental problem.  Because of this, menstruation had a great impact on their character.  In many cases, it dominated it.  It’s for this reason I spoke of them as having the ‘menstrual character’.  Many feminists have this character. 

That’s no mistake, as I found out.

The ‘menstrual character’ reflects an inability to deal with the menstrual situation.  This causes a number of reactions such as:

  • A denial.  This can get to the point of denying that their even female!
  • A rage and a ‘getting out of control’.
  • An anger.  I’ve seen girls get pissed at the drop of a hat!
  • A tendency to accuse and blame.

One of the qualities, of all these, is that they were generally done blindly.  In other words, it was an emotion that ‘just happened’.  This meant that the existence of the emotion was the dominant feature.  It didn’t need an object.  When an object appeared it was often treated secondarily.  This ’emotion dominant’ quality often reinforces how helpless and slavish they are, as they often have no control over it.  They are, in a way, ‘overwhelmed’ by it. 

Many of these girls will develop a great sense of helplessness, of feeling controlled, that they struggle with all their life.  This makes some girls ‘bitchy’ and difficult oftentimes.  They will often go through great lengths to try to not feel this way or to convince themselves they don’t have this problem.

I was often struck how, when the ‘menstrual character’ had these problems, they often seemed to automatically look at the male, usually blaming, criticizing, or giving him the ‘brunt’ of the emotion.  It was often almost like a reflex action.  So we see a pattern:

feel helpless>>>look at male>>>put the conflict onto him

I have always believed that this tendency is a result of a natural phenemena based on what menstruation is all about:  childbearing.  The passion, conflict, and difficulties of menstruation are all linked to childbearing and the male is involved with childbearing.  As a result, the female tends to keep making the male ‘appear’ with this type of conflilct.  In addition, menstruation hides a ‘yearning’ for a child.  This often creates an inner sense of a ‘lacking’ in many females.  They feel that something is ‘missing’.  So we see an association:

menstruation>>>childbearing>>>a sense of ‘lacking’>>>a looking toward the male

Most of the time these are emotions that are ‘hidden’.  In fact, they are not really emotions at all but are really more of a passion, something that ‘moves’ them, that makes them do things.  As a result, many of these feelings go unnoticed and unrecognized. 

In many ways, the passion of menstruation is nothing but an unrest pushing girls to childbearing.  Its like a secret instinctual force that is beyond their control.  But, for some girls it can be of such a nature that they have trouble dealing with it.  This often causes a number of feelings:

  • A feeling of great unrest, unhappiness, fidgityness, or irritation.
  • A feeling of ‘lacking’, which often appears as a sense of being deprived, victimized, damaged, or hurt in some way.
  • A sense of ‘needing’ someone. 
  • A feeling that makes them to look to the male for ‘answers’. 

All this is, if you look at it closely, is really the desire for a child.  From these we see some of the basic ‘complaints’ of many feminists:

  • A feeling of being unhappy about things and who one is.
  • A feeling of being a enslaved, a victim, inferior, and such causing low self-esteem.
  • Of having to have someone to blame.
  • The trying not be female or in trying to be malish, claiming ‘equality’ and seeking male things such as having a career, pursuing male sports, etc.

What this means is that many of the feelings feminists have is nothing but a warped misguided desire for a child! 

That’s always been bizarre to me!

My observation is that females, nowadays, are becoming so alienated in this high and mighty super advanced modern world that there is no firm identity to give all their childbearing passion, so to speak, a correct path to take.  It’s like this passion is just ‘going anywhere’.  As a result, it gets misguided.

Centuries ago, females had defined roles, activities, behavour, and self perceptions that gave all this passion MEANING and a PLACE.  It USED this passion in a PRODUCTIVE and NATURAL way.  That is now GONE.  As a result, females are left with a POWERFUL passion that has NOWHERE TO GO.  Not only that, it has no apparent MEANING.  It’s just ‘there’.  For many girls this leads to a lifelong crisis with this passion that will never be resolved.  It becomes involved with various types of neurosis, and other female mental problems.  For some girls it makes the philosophy of feminism appealing, as this philosophy is tailor-made for the issues of this conflict.  The problem is that, feminism is only a reaction to this conflict (giving it its ‘tailor-made’ quality).  It does not, in any way, solve the crisis.  In fact, it only further entrenches females into the crisis. 

In effect, then, what we are looking at is another form of alienation, dehumanization, and identity problems created by the modern world.


Be wary of their low opinion of themselves –  Being around feminists, to me, was like being around a bunch of kids with low self-esteem.  Because of this they see examples of their low self-esteem everywhere and in everything.  Its like I had to walk on ‘tippy toes’ around them for fear they might find some reason to project their low self-esteem onto me and blame me for it.  Often, with feminists, I felt that I was continually in amidst an endless battle of self-esteem problems.  It was like a battle ground of people trying to avoid or deny their low self-esteem problems. 

I’ve found that many will try to wrap you up and try to ‘drag you down’ into it.  It seems like there are stages to this process that went something like:

  1. They feel a low opinion of themselves.  Here its personal and stays to themselves.
  2. They recognize this feeling and mention it.  Here it’s ‘out’ but still confined to themselves.
  3. They blame or accuse someone or something for it.  Here it is now ‘projected’ or put onto someone else.
  4. They think they are superior, usually requiring that someone be degraded.  Here they think they are ‘above’ the problem.

Some girls would go through all of the stages.  Some would only partially go through the stages (such as to stage 3). 

Be wary of ‘projection’ –  The criticism above shows the persistent theme of low self-image or self-degradation and then ‘projecting’ it onto other people, claiming that they are the ones making them feel that way.  One must be cautious of this all the time and watch for it.

It’s for this reason I always jokingly say that, when you are around a feminist arm yourself with this statement:


And this statement:


Often, when they start projecting things onto us they start to TELL US WHAT WE THINK AND WHAT WE ARE DOING AND WHY WE’RE DOING IT.  In short, they start to put words into our mouths.  In fact, many feminists practice an argument style that is based in putting words in your mouth.  It’s not a debate more so as a telling us of why we do what we do.  She “wins” when she convinces us that what she put in our mouths is our own.  I’ve learned to be very cautious of this.  I’ve sat and watched many guys stumped and bewildered because they keep putting words in their mouths.  I’ve seen it done to such an extent that  guys will get confused and no longer know what they think anymore.  I wish I had film of it.  As a result, one must be wary of how they put words into our mouth.  It’s interesting to point out that the only other time that I’ve seen this argument style is when wives often argue with their husbands. 

Be wary of their political views –  I was disappointed that this girl did not bring up any political views, as its often used, almost like a weapon, to ‘justify’ their claims.  Remember, feminism got its ‘power’ from the glorification of ‘freedom and democracy’ during the ‘cold war’.  That made its claims ‘relevent’.  Because of this, we need to discount the ‘freedom ad democracy’ line.  In other words, we need to insist on other ways of looking at things.  My general stance toward this is:


This is true, too.  The cold war is 20 years gone.  It’s time to move on.  It’s time to forget all the fears, paranoias, and such of that era.  The ‘threat to our freedom and democracy’ is no longer relevent now.  The ‘cold war line’ of thought no longer works for todays reality.  This, to me, needs to be emphasized.

Be wary of their claims of abuse, victimizing, enslavement, oppression, etc. – I think its time, now, to say that all this nonsense about how females have been abused, enslaved, etc., since the beginning of time, is ridiculous.  This should be stated, too, and OUT LOUD.  My personal feelings is that THIS SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED anymore. 

Be wary of their attempts at being men – A female man-want-to-be has always been one of the lowest a female can be, in my opinion.  I look down on girls who try to be like men and I’ll tell them too.  I also am not tolerable of ANY competition between the sexes.  I shouldn’t have to, in any way, compete with a female. 

Be wary of their lack of respect for you – One of the things this girl brought up was how I mentioned that guys did a lot for girls.  She turned it into a degradation of the female.  This is expected of a feminist and reflects their general attitude of self-degradation.  It also shows a typical attitude of a lack of appreciation and respect of other people, particularly the male.  NEVER have I seen a feminist show any acknowladgement, appreciation, or even an awareness of what guys have given them or what we do for them.  This is no wonder as feminism is a misandric male-condemning philosophy.  This is significant because I have found that people who have self-respect tend to have respect for what other people do for them.  Accordingly, when people show ABSOLUTELY NO RESPECT for what other people have done for them then it tends to mean they have NO SELF-RESPECT.  This is further proof of how low self-respect is at the heart of feminism.  

This is why I tend to emphasize that females need to learn self-respect.  In fact, this seems a crisis.  Nowadays, females need to develop a healthy, human, and realistic view of what a female is.  The feminist talks about how bad the “old” versions of the female were.  Well, what about their image?  Lets look at a feminists version of a female:  paranoid, they see everything as degrading them, they see themselves as victims, thinks males are plotting against them since the beginning of time, male hating, they try to be men, try to avoid female things, and so on.  That’s a healthy image of a female?  I don’t think so.  Where is there even any female qualities?  Is there even any?


Learning appreciation is a good thing.  I have always believed that we, as people, should often reflect on what the mother and father has done for us, now and in the past.  We should also learn to appreciate, love, and respect the different naturally appearing qualities in the male and in the female.  We should also try to develop them and let them grow, to allow our boys to develop malish qualities and the girls to develop femalish qualities.  We should NOT give messages to our kids that its OK for a female to be a male and vice versa, nor should we encourage it.  ONLY IN FOLLOWING WHO WE NATURALLY ARE WILL WE BECOME ANYONE.  This is part of the problem of the modern world.  With all the machines, mass media, and such we are no longer becoming who we naturally are.  We are losing site of this fact.  Females, it appears, are struggling with this fact quite heavily.

Another reason why we need to be who we naturally are is because is creates self-esteem and self-respect.  When we do not become who we naturally are it often means that we will lose self-esteem and self-respect.  In fact, one of the ‘cures’ for low self-esteem and low self-respect is to “rediscover” who we are, of letting our ‘true’ self out, of letting ourselves be who we are.  We do not learn self-respect and self-esteem by being something we’re not or in chasing an image of what we ‘think’ we are or would like to beThese attitudes, though, have become quite prevalent in the modern world, and especially in the U.S., which preaches you can be “whatever you want to be”.  This American ideal leads many people right off the track, causing a lot of self-esteem and self-respect problems in this country (that everyone “pretends” doesn’t exist)

But, nowadays, females are having self-esteem and self-respect problems, as well as identity problems.  After years of observation I’m actually under the opinion that feminism is playing a large factor in this problem

Why is this?  Well, look at what it has to offer.  In reality, feminism has little to offer girls nowadays.  Despite all the political/legal mumbo-jumbo, there’s not a whole lot. 

I should point out that we are discussing a human problem, not a political one.  As a result, the question of low self-esteem and low self-respect, as well as identity, is a human problem, not a political one.  Don’t lecture me about ‘rights’ and ‘equality’.  When dealing with the human situation we need to look at from a human angle . . . period!  That’s what I’m doing here.

From the human angle, feminism offers very little to girls.  What little it offers ends up becoming like a ridiculous caricature of a female.  It teaches values that are anti-female, anti-male, anti-family, anti-society.  It teaches paranoia and lack of trust in people, such as the male, which means they don’t have a sense of ‘community’ or that they are part of a society, which they play a part in.  By degrading the female it teaches lack of respect of self and ones identity.  By pursuing male things and occupations they travel even further from themselves.  Everywhere you turn with feminism, on the human level it seems to lead to something like an alienation.   Sure, it may sound good politically . . . but humanly . . . its ridiculous.  Most feminists justify everything politically, as if their political theory is more ‘right’ than human reality. 

Well, we’re finding out that this isn’t true.

There are times when it seems to me that all feminism offers girls is that they should have a career.  Of course, it has to be a college-based career . . .  Not only that, they need to be single mothers.  Achieve! Achieve!  Success!  Success!   Though this caters to America’s ideal of achievement and success, its actually, on the human level, very little.  In the past, females did many things, had many roles.  They participated in society in many different ways . . . they contributed.  Feminism, really, only offers one path:  a single mother who has a college-based career. 

That’s it!

As human beings, that’s almost nothing compared to what females were doing in the past!

Not only that it teaches girls to not be part of a family and practically glorifies a single mother.  In addition, it teaches girls to burden themselves to death with education, a career, endless responsibility, achievement, and being a single mom, pursuing some stupid ideal of a ‘super female’.  This, alone, is causing a lot of problems for many girls.  I’m seeing that this is causing great stress, despair, and unhappiness in girls nowadays.  Interestingly, it is denied and not acknowladged . . . everything for the ideal of the ‘super female’!  Stand back and take a look.  Some girls are really suffering.  That’s as plain as day to me.  But its all hidden behind stupid poltical theories and fancy feminist doctrine.  If you can’t look beyond them, then it can be hard to see, such is the power of the ‘feminist facade’.

In the end, though, some of the things that feminism has shown me is:

  • The desparate need for self-respect and self-esteem that we all have.  When we lose it we can become ‘desparate’ for it. 
  • How precious these things really are.  In many ways, it’s like a treasure we must guard and protect. It’s also something we must grow and cultivate.
  •  That they are based more in conforming to our natural humanity and that when we try to conform to an image (such as the feminists image) it tends to take it away.
This entry was posted in Dehumanization and alienation, Feminism: a destructive philosophy, Male and female, Modern life and society, Replies to articles, The U.S. and American society and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s