FSW

Source: elmundo.es/papel/2020/05/05/5eafeb2e21efa044598b459c.html

Diego de los Santos: "Men in Spain are second-class citizens

Diego de los Santos. Lüdenscheid, Germany, 1969. This biologist and doctor in Ecology, who defines himself as an anti-system, is the author of 'Género Singular. Manual para gente sin género' (Samarcanda), a controversial anti-feminist book.

Reporter: Why is his work so anti-feminist?

Interviewee: Whoever defends equality today will necessarily be against this feminism, which is the greatest source of legal inequality that exists in Spain.

Reporter: Has it rained a lot of criticism on you?

Interviewee: No, on the contrary. The rejection of this 'gender' feminism is already quite common. People are coming out of the ideological closet, fortunately. That's what my book is for, in case anyone needs a little push to think without taboos.

Reporter: Feminism defends the equality of men and women, don't you agree?

Interviewee: That's what the RAE (Royal Spanish Academy) says, but the reality is different. Feminism, in the name of equality, has done away with equality. Anyone who hasn't heard of this is living on another planet. Or it's that they don't want to know.

Reporter: Why do you say that feminism is a neo-Machism?

Interviewee: Because it defends a savage segregation in the law on the basis of sex. And because it focuses the debate on female victimhood. For feminism, as for machismo, "boys don't cry, they have to fight", as Bosé sang. In essence, nothing has changed. We men now have to escape from this post-modern machismo that is called feminism, and which objectifies us.

Reporter: His thesis would fit if there were as many men as women killed by their partners.

Interviewee: They have told us: since Pepe has killed his wife, and Pepe is a man, men are murderers, and we can already discriminate against them. It is a fallacy, it is perverse, because those who kill are the murderers, not the men. I refuse to be put in the sack of monsters, if I accepted it I would lose that human dignity that today they want to take away from me.

Reporter: Nor have we ever had a woman president of the government.

Interviewee: There is a symbiosis between feminism and political power, but it is a macho pact. None of the feminist parties we have in Spain has ever proposed a female candidate. The role of feminism in this marriage of convenience is, from a second level, to manipulate the female vote.

Reporter: Is the female vote manipulated?

Interviewee: Feminism offers women privileges in exchange for their vote. Or a false security, after putting fear in her body. But the most aberrant thing is to offer a legal channel for their resentment 'of sex', as is the Gender Violence Law.

Reporter: He maintains that the only minority discriminated against in Spain legally are heterosexual men.

Interviewee: That is not an opinion, it is an irrefutable legal fact. And it is very serious. Men in Spain are second-class citizens because they are denied fundamental rights, such as the presumption of innocence no less, for a mere anatomical reason.

Reporter: But white, heterosexual men are in the majority in management positions in companies and also in the administration.

Interviewee: I am a white heterosexual and do not hold any position, as most do. And I'm a person rather than a statistic; my fundamental rights are above that. By the way, many more men die in wars, or from suicide, or from accidents at work, and no one claims that.

Reporter: He is very critical of the Gender Violence Law, a legislation endorsed by the Constitutional Court.

Interviewee: It is a political law, Zapatero's first law, which marks the beginning of the era of 'gender' in Spain as an electoral strategy. It was narrowly validated, thanks to the politicization of the high courts that we suffer in Spain, which generates all the injustice you can imagine.

Reporter: If this law did not exist...

Interviewee: This law has not solved any problem of violence, on the contrary. And it has generated a new violence within the intimacy that will annihilate any private space. It is a perverse law, a virus that is introduced into the couple to destroy it. If it didn't exist, we would be much better off in every respect, statistics included.

Reporter: There is consensus among all political parties, except Vox, in the defense of the Gender Violence Law.

Interviewee: Of course, feminism has such electoral power that it says: this is not debated. And everyone bows their heads. But now a party has arrived, I don't care what it's called, that won't shut up, and defends non-discrimination on the basis of sex. Many will vote for it just because of that.

Reporter: But is this why men vote for Vox?

Interviewee: Thanks to Vox men can now vote on 'gender' issues, and of course they are doing so. Last year there were more than 166,000 complaints of gender violence, and the innocent people affected, which is the vast majority, have to defend themselves by voting, they have no choice. In the end feminism conditions the electoral dynamics of this country, covering up many real problems.

Reporter: There are feminist men.

Interviewee: There are men who are afraid of feminism, and men of good faith who have swallowed the story.

Reporter: There are feminist men.

Interviewee: There are men who are afraid of feminism, and men of good faith who have swallowed the story. But they have in common the feeling of guilt for something they have not done, because they have been brainwashed. Then there are the opportunists, of politics or whatever, called "manginas" in the new jargon of resistance.

Reporter: And male chauvinists.

Interviewee: The most sexist are feminists, who demand privileges because of their sexual condition. What do you say about the son of an Andalusian historian defending these theses? My father was an incorruptible defender of equality, that's why he was the founder of political Andalusism, to vindicate territorial equality. Regarding 'gender', read his book Las mujeres que no amaban a los hombres, 2010. So it was scary to mess with feminism, but he did it.

Reporter: Did he suffer any 'aggression' from feminism?

Interviewee: No, except for that typical ambiguous message of "if I wanted to, I could fuck up your life". Just putting this perverse idea, and so real, on the table is already an aggression. Because men in Spain are at the mercy of arbitrariness. That's why most intelligent and sensible people don't let themselves be contaminated by this garbage, because intimacy would be impossible.

Reporter: He disputed the primary with Albert Rivera in 2017.

Interviewee: Yes, many of us saw Rivera's opportunistic drift, that confusing the political center with opportunism, that wanting to be everywhere. In the end he was not in any of them. We ran the opposition campaign facing the gallery, because the internal debate was non-existent.

Reporter: In 2015 he participated in the elaboration of the first electoral program of Cs to some generals.

Interviewee: I was very excited about Ciudadanos, which included all the illustrated ideas of the UPyD. We managed to introduce into that first electoral program a key phrase: "Ending criminal asymmetry based on sex". It only lasted a few months, the time it took to pressure Rivera to remove it.

Reporter: Now it is questioned whether the government authorized the 8-M feminist demonstrations, despite the fact that there were already cases of coronavirus.

Interviewee: When a political fiction does not attend to the urgency of reality, the effects are devastating. The government was so imbued with its 8-M political agenda that it was impossible, with those glasses on, to see what was coming. Today I am concerned that those are the only glasses they have. Or that, perhaps, they did see it coming, and now 'everything is possible' in Spain.