[Editor: Anonxcf just submitted the below comment, but the week is drawing to a close and it just happens to touch on something that has been on my mind recently. The programs known as "gender studies" in American universities are beyond redundant at this point; they are just plain hateful and destructive. With far more girls than boys going on to college, what's the point of classes that teach unveiled hatred and contempt for men, and promote conflict between the sexes? In addition to their destructive, wasteful program, people involved in gender studies programs are at the forefront of squelching free speech and crushing dissent in schools. They are run by totalitarian powermongers, usually people with a great deal of hatred for men in general. As they claim to fight "misogyny," they do nothing but stir up resentment and disharmony.
Gender studies programs are like a festering sore in our institutions, and the most disgusting thing about them is that it is often unwitting taxpayers who foot the bill. Anonxcf gets it exactly right: these people should not be given tenure or a pulpit from which to spew their hatred and sow discord between our young men and women. They should be tossed out of their sinecures and given the opportunity to make a living in the private sector, like most of the rest of us.]
Anonxcf:
I don’t think it’s an accident that the groups that have low replacement rates swarm so hardcore to the schools. From trying to strengthen federal control of all state education departments, to actually serving as teachers and administrators, to being ALL UP IN professorships at college, the feminist plan for producing new feminists is and always has been converting the sons and daughters of non-feminist families.
Techniques such as:
-> Shaming the boys. Imply to a boy that his desire for sex is insulting and puts him in a monstrous position (the culmination of this is the “all piv is rape” bullshit, but even without that there’s the implication that the boy is in a lesser position and brings less value). Then state that MANY men do this. The logical (and planned) exit here, if you accept these principles, is the acceptance of the feminist story: that men are privileged, that he has to work to be a Good Man (or a Good Boy) in order to not be subject to the shaming.
-> Promising fantastic prizes to the girls. Primarily, this takes the form of an emotional low and high- people are definitely subject to being told that things are not their fault, that their position would be so much better if not for some villains. Secondarily, there is the actual physical redistribution of wealth. Most people, men and women, have never even questioned the idea that an older couple where a divorce happens, should involve alimony or some equivalent. So the monetary and emotional prizes of behaving in a self serving, female supremacist manner, are sold to young girls, with a narrative of “the men deserve it”.
-> Dehumanize the men. If everyone woke up tomorrow with no memory of anything except how to produce food, imagine how many generational conflicts would simply never exist. Why look at such a ludicrous, fantastic situation? Because to forment hatred, distrust, or malice towards a group of people, we must feel that they deserve it, feel that they aren’t people in the same way we are. If I tell you a full history of the mideast, you might find yourself favoring one faction or people over the other. If you were BORN into that faction, you would absolutely be sold on that fight. Men are dehumanized through stories of oppression, stories of women as property, stories of women denied education. The times when brothers and sisters in the same family ended with the women educated and men simply thrown into a meat grinder of war (much of Europe) are forgotten, or reframed to imply that the manly men were in charge, by looking only at those who had survived terrible odds to even survive- essentially, a lottery winner, the apex fallacy applied to war survivors. Men are dehumanized through painting the successful males as harmful predators, as if all business were illicit, and the painting of unsuccessful males (which by the female sex drive is well over half of males, no matter how ludicrously safe or wealthy your nation) as being unworthy of your notice.
Feminists don’t need to breed to make more feminists. All they need to do is what they HAVE done, unopposed ideologically. Painting an entire sex with a foul brush needs to be recognized as hateful, not given fucking tenure and an interview in mass media. It needs to be seen as what it is, a call to violence, a call to inequality, a call to the application of force, instead of just being seen as “poor women fighting for equality”.
