I currently have most of my conversations about the state of the world with women, as most men I have contact with are primarily interested in sports. I use some of these conversations as inspiration for articles and stories. Recently, two of these ladies noted that I seem dead-set against feminism or ‘the feminine’ in my writing, which I think confuses them since I’m such a female-friendly guy in person. In fact, in my personal life, I am known for being endlessly forgiving where ladies are concerned and cruel to a Darwinian degree where men are concerned. I have walked by boys as they were beaten, stomped, and even tortured, without even a word.

What gives?

My writing on gender has not been embraced by the ‘manosphere’ masculinity nerds. In fact, I am so critical of weak men that some feminists that I know [two, actually, but not the same two mentioned above] think that I am overly masculine in outlook. These feminists are of the opinion that weak men should be tolerated as much as weak women. I disagree.

I have just spilled 174 pages worth of toner on my extreme masculinity screed Taboo You, so have devoted much thought to this question lately. So, to the appearance that my many criticisms of a feminine worldview equate to a misogynistic outlook I devote the following clarification.

Men and women naturally compliment each other. It takes an oppressive social order to warp this relationship. Women of my grandmothers’ generation knew a world when women were property, with little or no rights. The resulting current assumption is that men oppress women in relatively free societies, and in primitive cultures, because there is no government to step in and keep the men from mistreating the women. The violent masculine man is blamed. This strikes to the core of my criticism of a feminized society, and comes from a misunderstanding of really lethal men, the kind of man that dominates freer and more primitive societies. It is assumed that it is the hyper masculine man that oppresses women.

My 1996-2000 study of violence in Baltimore unearthed 13 hyper-masculine violent males out of nearly a thousand. Two of these 13 men were abusive to women. All of the others were virtual dolts when around the women in their life, making this group less likely to abuse women than the general Harm City population, where 3 in 10 men will typically use force against women. This used to be a standard fiction trope that is largely buried now under the feminine influence in literature [every movie optioned from fantasy and sci-fi has a ‘woman of power’ who slaughters men with a flick of her hair.], making the ‘chivalrous’ male character unnecessary.

In contrast to the modern view of the hyper-masculine abusive male, my research, reading, and personal experience has taught me that it is predominantly the weak man who abuses the woman, just as it is predominantly the woman who abuses the child, and the older child who abuses the younger. It is those who feel powerless who abuse others in most cases. Physically I am not powerful, and I have only met one wife-beater who I could not easily have beaten myself, and he was totally insane. A great example of weaklings oppressing women is the Arab man—who hasn’t won a war since the Middle Ages—who needs an entire religious establishment, a vast social organism devoted to world domination [I read the Koran twice], to keep his woman faithful to him.

Let me use as an example, the plight of Waving Grass, an abducted Native American who was then ostracized by her captor’s people, the Cheyenne. She was saved by the strongest Mountain Man, and most prolific killer to ever walk the North American continent, ‘Liver-Eater’ Johnson. Johnson kept her with him for two years and claimed that he did not have relations with her, as they were not married. He gave her all of the goods they accumulated over their trapping partnership, armed her with rifle, pistol and knife, and delivered her to an agency for widowed Indian women, which I suppose he felt largely responsible for stocking.

Now, this agency just turned out to be a whore house for U.S. soldiers who would rape these women. When one soldier was introduced to the facility, as he and two others stood over three ‘squaws’ discussing their use, one of the Native women turned and flashed angry eyes at them, and spoke in ‘good English’, declaring that she was Waving Grass, ‘Wife of Liver-Eater Johnson’. Smart women like Waving Grass know that the real killers among men generally do not abuse their women, and that men who typically abuse women are terrified of the killers.

I see this dichotomy every day at work, on the bus, in sports. It is pretty simple: the weak man wants to feel strong so he imposes his will on the woman through physical means. And men, like myself, who have physically imposed our will on numerous other men 1. Feel no desire to impose our will on women and 2. Know intuitively that those who do are beneath contempt and easily handled.

I have had over a dozen women notice me in the midst of a chaotic male environment [bars, bus stops, work] and seek out my company in a blatant attempt to curb the aggression of other men being directed at them. I once went to O’Conner’s Bar in Highlandtown Baltimore in the mid-90s. That was a rough area, full of tough ethnic whites. Three of these goons were rudely threatening to ‘gang bang’ a married woman who had just stopped in to get a six-pack to go home and have with her husband. The barmaid was pretending not to notice. It took her mere seconds to size up the fact that they were afraid of me, and that I was already eying the leader with bad intentions. I and these three were the only males in the bar. I said nothing—never do in such cases. She walked over to me, put her arm through mine, and said, “Please get me out of here.”

To get her out of there immediately would have been to acknowledge these bums as men—a threat to me—rather than the vermin that they were. You cannot do anything to permit such subhuman males to maintain a masculine self-image after publicly showing aggression towards a woman without making them more likely to do violence to women. I bought her a drink and slowly drank my beer as I stared at these animals. It did not even take a whole beer to ruin their group cohesion. The two meat heads drifted to the back area, and I blew a kiss to their ‘alpha’ who just swallowed hard and started drinking whiskey straight up. Her name was Connie and she understood the masculine dynamics of social aggression and physical violence.

Once men gave up the duty to protect their women in America to law enforcement—who is never on the ground for prevention—women had to band together, get the vote, initiate legislation, and harness the police state to marginalize the threat, which took about 100 years. This has resulted in a general female orientation towards the pervasive male threat, which is removing the possibility through denaturing the male child as soon as possible. This makes sense since women still maintain control of most childrearing.

I like women more than men, and like strong women more than weak ones. I have had my best friendships and best sex with feminists, and think they should have a voice. I do think that a society run primarily along feminist lines will be as unbalanced and as unlikely to result in happy men and women as our previous sleazy patriarchies did. I see the biggest danger in a society run according to a feminine ethic to be reduced liberty through a need for total security and absence of risk. I am not laying this caution at the foot of women alone, but also the many men who have adopted what I have called the ‘feminine ethic’, but is in actuality just a judgment-skewing aversion to risk, which leads to an easily frightened society.

As always, those easily frightened, are easily used and abused.