I Don’t Need Feminism: Part 3, you dig your own grave.

Posted: January 16, 2014 in Uncategorized

Ok, so, apparently, the introduction to part 2 of this little trio of entries was a little self serving and mushy. Well, I apologise for using this personal blog to write about my personal feelings and offending your sensibilities, how very careless of me. Just as a point for the future, me telling you how I am feeling at the beginning of one blog entry is so far and away from me playing the victim that comparing the two is clutching at the biggest bunch of straws. Victimisation is not telling people you feel a bit shit, it is about twisting every situation to be all about you and how you are being discriminated against. And for the record, I don’t claim women play the victim, I claim feminism uses the victim complex as a tool against criticism.

Anyway, I had to cut short Part 2 because it was late and I’d already written 5 pages of stuff, I figured I needed to split it otherwise people would be burnt out and not really take in the last few points. I looked at a lot of stuff in Part 2, a lot of stuff already covered within various entries in this blog. I cut off at the point I did because I wanted to focus on the last 2 points with enough focus to really drive home how much a part of feminism they are.

One category is the use of outright lies and myths. Things like the gender wage gap, rape statistics and other facts that help prove the feminist mantra of men = abuser, women = abused, despite the fact the statistics put forward have either been debunked numerous times, or are so many years old as to be inadmissible in any form of logical debate.

The second category is the idea of misrepresentation and/or oversimplification. This can tie in with the idea of myths and lies as often a feminist will present a fact that seems to be pretty discriminatory against women, but is either a) not as bad as they claim or b) omitting some rather important facts that completely re-shape their argument.

One example that I would love to use but can’t is a picture Women’s Rights News put on Facebook a couple of months ago. It was a picture of a young middle Eastern girl (I can’t remember is her nationality was named) on a plinth in the middle of a market-square-esque place, surrounding by a crowd of men who seemed to be pointing at her. Women’s Rights News (WRN) put up a caption saying this was an example of a young girl being sold for sex in this particular middle eastern country. Of course, the people in the comments were rightly outraged. This was disgusting and just proves how sick the middle east is, how much it hates women and girls, how rape culture permeates every fibre of their society.

Of course, the picture was bullshit, a modicum of research proved that this was, in fact, the complete opposite of what WRN said it was. Apparently, the young girl had recently been orphaned and the group of men surrounding her were praying for her, praying that their god would keep her safe. Despite the fact that numerous people, including myself, outright stated in the comments that WRN was horrifyingly wrong, people still continued to post their outrage. That is feminism, my friends. Despite being told numerous times, people (men and women) were so willing to be outraged at this perceived injustice against women, they were actively ignoring the truth. Ignoring the truth, how insane is that. So hyped up on victim culture and the desire to blame the middle east for its horrendous views that they weren’t even willing to do research or, when directly told the truth, listen to anything other than their idiotic, might-as-well-have-been-wielding-pitchforks-and-torches mob of crazy harpies.

Alas, why can’t I show you this particular post? Because WRN, being the cowards they are, took down the picture once they realised their mistake. That, surely, is a victory for common sense? Well, it would be, except WRN didn’t even have the common decency to admit they’d made a mistake, that they’d been so willing to believe what they were told, without doing their own research, that they posted something so horrendously misrepresented. Nope, no apology, no admission of guilty, no ‘we’ll do better next time’, just a clandestine removal and then silence. To make matters worse, a few days later they posted another meme about the importance of evidence when making a claim.

That outrageous level of hypocrisy destroyed the very little amount of respect I had for that page. A prime example of the feminist mindset. I’m so pissed I didn’t take a screencap while it was still up as I have no way of proving that’s what happened, you only have my word for it. If anyone else happened to see that particular post, please speak up, it’ll make it harder for them to deny.

Anyway, that’s not the only thing WRN have posted that either distorts the truth or oversimplifies it. There was a post a few days ago concerning a situation that happened in Iowa that serves as a perfect example of the way feminism presents an oversimplified, overly-emotional view of something that, in actual fact, is a lot more complex:


Makes it sound like a pretty clear cut case of discrimination, yes? Oh, those horrible men, who are probably just jealous of women for being attractive and want to make them suffer by allowing men to fire them at the drop of a hat. Damn these good looks, how come I have to suffer just for being beautiful, how unfair is…oh, wait, it’s just not that simple is it!


It would appear that WRN have massively oversimplified this. That meme implies it is legal for any man to fire any woman for being attractive, and the fact it was an all male supreme court somehow makes this one massive case of institutionalised misogyny! However, if you look at the actual facts (someone posted the link to the actual judge’s ruling, and I can’t bloody find it again) it’s not all men who can fire all women, it’s very specific to this one case, which is more complex than ‘you’re pretty, you’re fired’ and involves a complex situation involving a dentist, his assistant and the dentist’s wife. Oversimplification, much like the picture of the middle eastern girl, is dangerous in that it presents a very distorted view of what is actually the truth. Plus, knowing the feminist tendency to believe whatever is put in front of them, it makes for a firestorm that is very hard to put out. Bad news travels fast, ignorant news travels faster.


Another one that really bugs me is the whole ‘women died to get the vote’ argument, perfectly captured with this little meme:


The common perception is that men have always had the ‘right’ to vote and women only gained it after dying in droves to secure it. Oversimplification, misrepresentation and outright lies all rolled into one. I don’t know about America, but here in Britain it seems the feminists are determined to airbrush history and replace it with one they have created. You see, women were restricted in their voting rights but, shock horror, so were men. It wasn’t until 1928 that both men and women over 21 could vote. That little fact seems to disappear from feminist conversations. The fact is, many of the millions of men who died in WWI couldn’t vote, and, interestingly, the suffragettes at the time shamed those men, who couldn’t vote, into going to war to die in the fields of France.

It would also appear that women were disenfranchised for a lot less time than feminists seem to claim:


But of course, actually telling the truth would mean having to let go of the victimhood, wouldn’t it!

Interestingly, the below article seems to suggest that, once the reforms of 1918 took place, there were actually more women than men allowed to vote:


In that article, the electorate rises from 8 million to 21, an increase of 13 million. That, supposedly, puts 13 million women to 8 million men. However, what that article doesn’t say is that some of those 13 million were men, so again it’s not quite accurate. Even so, it still proves the feminists love to lie about voting rights. It’s something that should be common knowledge, but is not.

Much the same as the cries about the vote, there’s always been the claim that women make up more than half of the worlds population but earn only 1% or thereabouts of the world income, and only own 10% of the land. I can’t find a picture of the meme that this is contained in, but I can find the article that helps debunk it:


So once again, feminists use an airbrushed view of the world, basically containing stats that can, in no way, be backed up with any degree of reputable sources. An outlandish claim that appeals to our emotions – ‘oh my god, that’s outrageous, I must share this at once and let everyone know the discrimination women face.’ – oh no, wait, it’s all based on lies. Much like this one:


A baseless claim that, due to the over-hysterical crowing of some people has somehow entered into the public conscience and become ‘fact’, much like rape stats and domestic violence stats:


However, as with many of the stats that seem to be favourites of the feminists they have been debunked numerous times, quite spectacularly in some cases:



Then there’s the wage gap, one of the worst discriminatory aspects of our misogynistic society – the fact that women are paid only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes. Feminists love this stat, even though it always appears in American currency, I think the UK total given is somewhere around 88 pence to the pound. This, supposedly, is a sad indictment of the way we look at women, they get paid less for the same work. But, again, oversimplification and outright lies come together to prove this stat. Every time there is a claim of the ‘wage gap’ all it takes is a little research to get to the bottom of it. There was a recent study in England that suggested female graduates made thousands of pounds less than male graduates even with the same university degree. The papers held on to this fact and ran with it. A cursory look at the actual report (made by HECSU) showed that, of those men and women with the same degree, there, again, wasn’t a comparable way of measuring money. A lot of the women either went back to the jobs they had been working whilst doing their degree (naturally paying lower) or went into areas such as teaching, while a lot of the men took apprenticeships with solicitors and law firms, which naturally paid higher. Again, the degree they had was the same, there was no denying that, but the actual work they chose to do after graduating is what made the figures seems worse. It just goes to show that a degree is actually no key to wealth, it is what you do with that degree that is important.

The wage gap is still talked about today as a massive problem. Thomas Sowell tore the mythical wage gap to shreds over 30 years ago:


If you want to talk about the influence feminism has on society, you only need to highlight the wage gap. A man can comprehensively prove that there is no discriminatory wage gap, the gap that does exist is down to a myriad or reasons, and yet, 30 years after doing so, we are still hearing about it. What was I saying earlier about feminists ignoring facts? Is it becoming clear why I say they love victimhood?

No wage gap, rape and domestic violence stats that are a lot lower than they claim, history not quite as black-and-white as they see and, overall, a tendency to oversimplify things in order to portray themselves as victims. This has taken 3 separate blog entries to really get into, that’s the scope of what we’re dealing with. The influence of feminism is massive. They control the rape statistics, they control the domestic violence statistics, the control the emotions of numerous followers, to the point that they can bend the truth, outright lie, manipulate things to paint themselves as the victim, and people will still follow them, blindly believe them because they are so entrenched in feminist theory that they don’t know how to do anything else.

Every time you hear a woman say NAFALT, ask them to tell you what the real rape stats are, who the real victims are in the domestic violence battle, the precise reasons, if any, they earn less. It is my experience, and countless others, that feminists don’t want to even up these figures, they don’t want true equality because that would mean having to accept that they actually aren’t the only victims in the world and, even if they do experience some form of sexism, it is primarily down to the individual involved and not an indication of systemic, institutionalised misogyny that is designed by the mythical patriarchy to keep them down.

One more example of misrepresentation allowing victimhood? Go on then:


Scroll down to the comments and see the numerous people playing victim:

I like the way it is reported as if it’s just the woman who was doing it! Had it just been her there wouldn’t have been a case to answer to but because he legged it and got away it’s her taking the “name and shame” lashing. I feel sorry for the poor child who is likely to suffer years of taunting because of this. Was it really necessary to name this woman? “

“How sexist to say ‘Woman caught … ‘. The headline should be ‘Two people caught …’ but then it’s the DM after all.” (headline is” Woman caught having sex on car bonnet in broad daylight with a man she met in a shop minutes earlier.” How much clearer can it be?)

This is my favourite:

“Wonderful sexism from the DM. So, was the man not mature enough to take some of the weight of the accusation. Why can’t the article say “man caught having sex on bonnet with a woman” instead of “women caught having sex on bonnet with man”?!! “

So it’s sexist to say a woman was caught with a man, but not at all sexist to say a man was caught with a woman? What on Earth do these people smoke.

There is a very simple explanation for why the article focuses entirely on the woman, as clearly stated:

“When officers arrived in the quiet cul-de-sac in Blackpool where the offence took place, the man fled by scaling a metal fence. An officer caught his ankles but he kicked out and escaped.”

It’s very hard to write an article about two people if you have absolutely no information on the second person. She met him in the shop, had sex with him and got arrested. He got away. How can you name and shame someone you don’t know the identity of? Simple feminist tactic, ignore the evidence and claim victimisation.

Ah go on then, one more:


Feminism fought for women, fought for women to be able to do what they want without fear of discrimination, without fear of sexism, without fear of prejudice, they fought for women to simply be without fear. But, for fucks sake, don’t you dare disagree with a feminists, because then you are in for one motherfucking epic hissy fit. On national television as well, has this woman no shame?

That’s right, folks, I saved, what I think is, the best til last. A woman chooses to live her life the way she wants to, chooses to do what is right for her marriage, and because it doesn’t suit the feminist ideal she gets shot down and shamed by one of the most pathetic tantrums ever seen on TV. Man, this is embarrassing. Seriously, is this what feminists want? This woman having this kind of overblown reaction on national television? I think it speaks volumes about what ‘real’ feminism is about. We fought for you to do what you want, but when you do what you want, and it is not to our liking, we reserve the right to shame the fuck out of you on national television and accuse you of being a gender traitor.

Feminism: giving you the choice to choose whatever life you want, as long as it’s one that we approve.

Have a nice day.

  1. I loved your response to the comment on the 2nd article. It’s your blog mate and you can say whatever the fuck you want haha!

    I will dig into this article soon… I’ve been looking forward to it.

    Thanks for writing… entertaining and informative.

    • johnsalmon86 says:

      Thanks, always tickles me when people ignore the message of the blog and go straight to the ad hominem.

      Thanks for the words, come back and give some feedback when you’ve read it.

      • Just a bit pressed for time and my comment on the other article didn’t seem to work. 🙂

        Glad you got a tickle though.

        “It is my experience, and countless others, that feminists don’t want to even up these figures, they don’t want true equality because that would mean having to accept that they actually aren’t the only victims in the world and, even if they do experience some form of sexism, it is primarily down to the individual involved and not an indication of systemic, institutionalised misogyny that is designed by the mythical patriarchy to keep them down.”

        Great statement. 🙂 I was just chatting with someone about how the individual is the smallest (and most discriminated against) minority. It INCLUDES all the other ‘victim’ groups… and recognising individual rights eliminates the need to rally for the rights of some other group. Women, men, gays, transgender, lesbian, bisexual, children, pensioners, black, white, mums, dads, absolutely everybody. Problem solved, in one fell swoop. (or swell foop as he would say)

        Not sure if you’ve seen this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4EDhdAHrOg#t=

        But to me it’s a great representation of the attitude of some feminists (and radicals in any sense). They simply don’t want an explanation or a solution… they just want to be sympathised with and felt sorry for to reinforce their authority as the victim.

        The early Thomas Sowell debate video was awesome. He is one smart dude.

        I seriously couldn’t get through the video of the feminist going off on live TV. Wow, too much crazy for me.

        My ex and her mother identify as feminists and I’m currently working through court to secure a larger share of custody of my 2 children (I’m currently ‘allowed’ 1.19% – 2 hours per week) and I’m struggling to understand how this makes sense to anyone.

        Gender bias is alive and well… but it’s not what people (feminists would lead you to) think.

        Loved the article (again) mate.

        Keep em coming!

        ~ Rusty

  2. Phil Z. says:

    Absolutely overjoyed I caught this post before I went to bed for the night (east coast of America)! Been reading your blog behind the scenes for a while, and really enjoy it. Keep up the awesome writing; you put into clear, concise argument what I cannot, for the sheer lopsided hypocrisy just drives me too emotionally crazy to even think straight. As a man who has been emotionally abused and coerced into sexual situations that I really didn’t want (“because if a girl does it, its not rape!”), I have been actively ignored and laughed at by females who believe the woman is always in the right… In summation, thank you for being an honest, unafraid voice of reason! I look forward to every post! 😀

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