Monday, 25 February 2013

Who The Enemy Really Is: Three of Three Things The Manosphere Doesn't Get

The final thing the Manosphere guys really, really don't get is that the enemy isn't "feminism". The enemy is a bunch of bureaucrats and lawyers in social services and family law, as well as a bunch of government-sponsored professional misandrists (literally "government-sponsored" as they are paid for in part by government grants). What other lawyers say about family lawyers is not flattering, and what other judges say about judges in the Family Court is downright slanderous. Let's just say that the brightest sparks go into corporate law and criminal defence. Well-balanced people with marketable skills do not, strangely, go into social services. Who would want to work with drug-taking abused children, adults who believe in witchcraft, women with so little self-respect they have children by more than one man, child molesters, parents who keep their child in a sack of dung, and colleagues who can seriously believe in ritual satanic abuse? And that's just Hackney. Is it any wonder that social services and family law attract women who have resentments against men and are looking to work out their personal problems on some poor schlub who let himself get screwed over by a manipulating harpy? The Family Court goes along with the social worker because no-one gets fired that way: the social worker is the Registered Expert, everyone else is just a judge, doctor or lawyer. And the social worker knows how to play the bureaucracy, because that's their job. Social workers aren't there to help people, they are there to process people through the system as they see fit. 

In the meantime, media moguls and editors know that Gender Wars have been going on forever and will always sell. That women are able to shriek the most egregious hate and contempt for men in print is proof that "nobody" takes it seriously. (But if some men do, and feel disempowered as a result, well, that's one more whipped office worker The Man has in harness. The writer gets paid, the editor gets copy, the publisher gets profits and the Bosses get fewer potential rebels. Everyone's a winner - except the losers.)

When I say "nobody" takes media misandry seriously, I mean, "nobody who matters". Like you and me and Ian Hislop and Rupert Murdoch. Sadly, your partner, or some harpy-with-a-grudge in HR, may think that it's the real thing. However, if they didn't have mainstream media misandry to read, they would invent it for themselves, or dig it up from the same lunatic marshes where British social workers found satanic ritual abuse. The problem isn't the media, it's that your employer can't be bothered to hire a decent HR department and your partner is looking for reasons to do you down. It's that politicians passed dumb enabling acts about equal opportunities and left the details for the bureaucrats to fill in. I grant that the presence of misandry in the mainstream media adds a background screech that we could all live without, but it isn't the cause of our woes.

Misandrist opinions, like hoop earrings, haughty attitudes and muffin tops, are one of the many ways that low-value women signal themselves. Kay Hymonwitz and Sandra Tsing Oh, to name but two, are sending messages they can't hear about just what ghastly women they are. Stop reading them. Stop listening to the Today Programme and reading the Daily Mail as well. Regular women aren't misandrists, just as regular men aren't misogynists, High-value women like high-value men and are secure enough to be polite to the rest of us; a woman who pursues high-value men and is rude to the rest of us is just a groupie.

There's a well-known process whereby government-sponsored agencies and academics have to put out press releases exaggerating their problems so they can get a grant for next year, so they can put out press releases exaggerating their problems so they can get a grant for next year. Government insiders are not actually influenced by those agencies' policies, though their speechwriters may use the hype when it suits them. You could almost say that the government pays these agencies to release distracting PR at a steady rate throughout the year. It does, but it didn't think of the idea first and then do it. It did it first by blind luck and will now deny that's what's happening. 

The misandrist hate and general contempt for the general public that some social workers have is despicable. Such people should not be in those positions. Catch is, the managers would have to hire people just like them as replacements, because you and I are never going to apply for those jobs. Not when we can get jobs working with normal(-ish) people. Those are the issues the MRA movement needs to look at. Real nitty-gritty stuff. They need to find sympathetic lawyers who can figure out how to bring any kind of civil action against individual social workers. They need to get some candid conversations on tape, and find disillusioned former social workers to turn over the stones the creepy things hide under. They need to get disillusioned Family Court lawyers to spill enough beans to expose that corrupt institution - in the UK, Family Courts are closed to the public, so that injustice cannot be seen being done. The real enemy is who it always was: the faceless, unaccountable bureaucrat. MRA's need to give them faces and names and make their mis-deeds public. It won't deter the hard-core cases, but it will discourage the fringe cases. 

Follow the money: publish the funding and salaries, the office rents and expenses. Publish photos of where they work. Publish photos of them - none of them look like angels. Don't address their ideological rantings. Find something to shut down their organisation. Expense fiddles. A history of poor payment to suppliers and staff. High salaries at the top and part-time minimum-wage, or "volunteers" who don't even get travel expenses, at the bottom. Hypocritical behaviour. Un-researched and hysterical claims. Whatever. Read Private Eye, those guys have been doing this stuff for years. Sadly, no-one can shut down a local council, but they sure can shut down some fringe organisation issuing hysterical misandrist press releases. If in doubt, publish their photographs.

If you are wondering why they don't do that now, it's because it isn't easy. That's why the bureaucrats get away with it. But they are the enemy. Not some professional harpy with a newspaper column who would be writing pro-marriage, anti-divorce, pro-life screeds if the wind suddenly blew that way. Those are professional opinion-mongers, not activists with integrity.

No comments:

Post a Comment