Species Dominance, Artilects, Artilect War, Cosmists, Terrans, Gigadeath, Essays, Media, etc




Prof. Dr. Hugo de Garis

 One of the most damning criticisms of the American MRM is that it has not achieved any of its major goals, i.e. of getting any piece of legislation changed that would give men better rights, not a single case.

This is a most damning truth, so one wonders why the MRM is so politically useless, given that its purpose is to reform the laws so that men’s rights are more respected by the law and by society in general.

I think there are several main reasons – that this flyer discusses. I will present them in bulleted form initially, and elaborate on them later.

  1. The MRM’s psychology is misguided, taking a “poor me, the man” attitude rather than an angry masculist approach.
  2. Not converting enough women into female masculists to overcome the “majority female bloc vote” problem.
  3. Lack of publicity flair.
  4. Lack of ideological, intellectual force.
  1. The MRM’s psychology is misguided, taking a “poor me, the man” attitude rather than an angry masculist approach.

Men are socialized to be tough, because traditionally, men were the sole breadwinners of the family. In the days before the welfare state, if a married father failed to bring home the bacon, then his family starved.

So boys were socialized to be tough, to bounce back after a setback, to keep performing, so that the family could survive. This socialization of boys was severe, much stricter and more brutal on boys than the socialization of girls to be care givers to children.

As a result of this, men have ingrained in them that they have to solve their own problems, not complain, to toughen up and perform. If they get fired from their jobs, they have to bounce back the next day and go hunting for another one, so that his family does not suffer, because he is the sole breadwinner.

When the American MRM complains to the general public that men suffer from X, Y and Z, in terms of lack of rights, and in a rather sheepish manner, it is a real turn off for many men, so it is not surprising that the US MRM has not achieved anything notable in terms of legislative change.

What the MRM lacks, is the angry political approach, lashing out at its enemies, angry masculist style, that men can identify with, that better suits their male personalities and gender role conditioning.

I say this with firsthand experience, because in the early 80s in Europe I almost single handedly put the men’s lib movement in Europe on the map, by taking an angry masculist approach. In the 80s I was by then quadrilingual (English, French, Dutch, German) and had about 150 TV, radio, newspaper and magazine appearances in Belgium, Holland, France, Germany Britain, Denmark and Australia.

I found that people paid attention to angry, articulate, highly intelligent males. After a decade of angry feminism in the 70s, the media (which was then still largely dominated by men) and the public, were ready to hear the other half’s story. In Australia, I even made the cover of Australia’s equivalent of Time magazine on men’s issues.

Most journalists today are female, so one could argue that it will be tougher to penetrate the media today with the masculist message than it was in the 80s. That sounds plausible to me. I already had some experience of this a few years ago, when I sent out a masculist press release to the major (mostly male) reporters of the major US and UK newspapers, Washington Post, New York Times, The Guardian, The Times, etc. I didn’t get a single reply back, even though I pitched the argument that the feminazi bitches had taken over the divorce courts, making them so toxic for men, that two thirds of young men have reacted by refusing to marry, refusing to have kids, and thus wiping out whole populations, the most important issue of our times.

Thus these feminazis have effectively, indirectly become genociders, wiping out whole populations and have to be stopped. Not a single reply. Why?

Are the male journalists afraid for their jobs if they come out with major masculist pieces? Has the power between the sexes in the media shifted so much that men are now afraid to speak up? Are male journalists not angry enough? What’s going on here?

As I write this flyer in my bedroom in my apartment in China, where I have been living for the past 11 years, I have no direct face to face experience with the western media. There are no organizations in China that are not controlled by the hated CCP (Chinese Communist Party). The last time a large private organization arose in China, the falangong (a quasi-religious deep-breathing movement) it was seen by the CCP as a threat to its power and was brutally suppressed with imprisonment, torture, murder etc. The CCP is a bunch of thugs.

Thus there is no organized feminism in China, and no masculism either. I will have to wait for a year or so, to finish up some work on my private library before I move to Melbourne Australia, to take up the generous offer of my sister to live rent free in a one bedroom apartment that she plans to buy.

I’m very curious to see what impact I will have on promoting masculism in Melbourne and Australia once I arrive there. Obviously I will take an angry masculist approach, to see if Australia’s male journalists respond. This approach worked fine in Australia in the early 80s, so will it work again, once I return to the country I grew up in? Time will tell.

I plan to begin with the universities, by writing major essays to be published in their student magazines, newspapers, websites, to stir up interest that way, and perhaps also by speaking at Melbourne’s “Speaker’s Corner,” equivalent to London’s Hyde Park “Speaker’s Corner.” I will also approach the media, trying to hook that first significant journalist.

From previous experience, I know that once one significant journalist bites, then the rest, sheep like, follow the herd. Journalists are always on the lookout for new stories, to make themselves stand out from the crowd, but they are constrained by the limits of the knowledge of their readers. The journalists cannot be too far ahead of the times of their readers, so breaking in a new topic is always difficult for the pioneers.

  1. Not converting enough women to female masculism to reduce the “majority female bloc vote” problem.

One of the main reasons why MGTOWs (men going their own way) choose to be so apolitical, is that they argue that 51% of the voters are female, who also vote more than men, so that any attempt by gender politicians to menfair the gender laws, will backfire, due to the majority bloc vote of women. Any male gender politician who tries to push for example, the legislation of the right to joint custody of children after a divorce, would lose his next election because of the majority female bloc vote.

So masculists need to reduce the size of the female bloc vote, and the most effective way to do that is to scare women into becoming female masculists, so that they vote together with the bloc male vote, to menfair the gender laws.

The masculists scare women into becoming female masculists by threatening them with babylessness using MGTOW tactics, i.e. refusing to marry, refusing to have kids, and spending their money on themselves. Masculists push the idea onto women, that “If you women want to have babies, then you will have to vote in favor of menfairing the gender laws, otherwise your majority female bloc vote will force gender politicians to continue the gender law status quo, and men will continue to boycott marriage and paternity.”

Masculists harangue the hated feminazi bitches who have taken over the divorce courts and use them to punish men for being men, by so financially massacring them, that two thirds of young men now reject marriage and paternity.

Women are getting the message, that men so hate feminazis that any young woman who’s stupid enough to state publically that she is a feminist, will suffer the kiss of death in her social circle, by not getting a man. No man wants a relationship with a misandrist, man dumping, feminazi bitch. Such women are the most rejected, the first to be totally ignored, the most hated.

Masculists teach women about the massive injustices against men, particularly the utter hypocrisy of the lack of a legislated Parer (paternity rejection right). Women have a legislated Marer (maternity rejection right). Women have the right to reject an unwanted pregnancy, but men have no such right, so millions of women get “accidentally” pregnant and then force men to pay for their babies, ruining these men’s live, a major female crime.

Masculists really need to work on women’s education concerning men’s issues, so that some women can learn to become sympathetic to men’s gender issues and vote with men for the menfairing of the gender laws.

  1. Lack of publicity flair.

The MRM it seems to me, lacks imagination when it comes to publicity. To get your message across, especially when it’s new, you need to create events that attract the attention of the media people. This takes imagination, which I don’t see coming from the MRM.

For example, after the universities have been well exposed to masculist thinking by major articles in their student newspapers, websites, etc., I might be invited to give a big talk at a university, helped by the local men’s lib group. If the feminazis turn up to try to destroy the talk by heckling, then the men’s group members could collectively bitch slap the feminazis out of the room.

Doing that would cause an uproar in the media. I could then get on the media and tell them, “Bitch slapping is what masculists do to feminazis to stop them from wiping out whole populations. Feminazis are genociders. Bitch slapping is preferable to bullets. These feminazi bitches have to be stopped, otherwise they wipe out humanity, by causing young men to refuse paternity, due to the toxicity of the divorce courts created by feminazi hatred of men. They have to be stopped. It will be interesting to see what kind of impact such a bitch slapping event would have.

If I speak at Speakers Corner in Melbourne, maybe some feminazis might try to harangue me, but I’m male. As a PhDed full research professor, I’m smarter and more articulate than nearly any female who tries to harangue me. I can use my male testosterone powered male verbal violence and particularly my masculist ideas to harangue back with a vengeance, blowing them away with male dominance. If some stupid feminazi slaps me, I’ll bitch slap her back. If she screams that “You don’t hit a woman!” I’ll rage at her for her feminazi, fluffie feminist hypocrisy.

Hopefully, in time, I will get a reputation for being a powerful persuasive orator, and in time the journalists will come out of curiosity to hear what all the fuss is about, get exposed to masculist ideas and then write up a big story about it and spread the ideas to the millions. That’s one of my plans.

Of course, I will keep making these YouTube flyer videos, because they go around the world, reaching more than I ever could standing on a mound of earth at speakers corner in Melbourne.

  1. Lack of ideological, intellectual force.

One of my main gripes with the MRM is their lack of intellectual force, their paucity of ideas. I find masculism much more persuasive, much more powerful, bitey, in your face, and hence much more attractive to men, and to male journalists.

For example, masculists scare women to become FIPs (financially independent persons) or be punished by not getting a man. Masculist theorists are very conscious that so many of men’s gender problems would be solved if we could all live in a “FIP Society” in which both sexes are FIPs, socialized and educated to be FIPs. Divorce laws could then be reformed, the Parer brought in, men would be more prepared to be fathers again without being financially massacred. Legal discriminations across the board would be menfaired.

Masculists express their hatred of fluffie parasites and feminazi bitches, making them so unpopular, that women are forced to adapt to men’s demands.

One of the most powerful ideas of the masculists is that “Men have the power to force women to be FIPs, or they don’t get a man.” A fluffie (a traditional woman who expects to be able to parasite off the money of a man) is treated by masculists as “immoral, parasitic, manslaving vermin, to be wiped out.”

A fluffie can only be a fluffie if she can manage to get her financial claws into some gullible manslave, but the masculists and MGTOWs are causing the supply of such manslaves to dry up, thus forcing fluffies to “FIP up,” i.e. bothering to get a career competent education so that she can be a FIP as an adult and not parasite off some manslave.

Such powerful ideas are pushed by the masculists to persuade women to FIP up, to vote with men to force the gender politicians to menfair the gender laws.

Masculists warn young men powerfully, not to marry, not to have kids, because if they are stupid and ignorant enough to do that, they then run the risk of being financially massacred at the hands of the hated feminazi dominated divorce courts where he will lose his kids with 90% probability, lose his house and half his possessions that go to his fluffie ex-wife. He will pay child support to kids he will barely see, and often pay alimony so that his fluffie ex-wife can continue to parasite off him after the divorce as she did before the divorce.

So masculists are very moralistic, very forceful, very oratorical, pushing their ideas onto both sexes, haranguing them to wake up, to get informed, to listen and learn, for the listeners own benefit.

Masculist ideas are just so much more forceful, and persuasive than the wishy washy wimpiness of the MRM, that it is not surprising that the MRM has achieved almost nothing, whereas I almost single handedly, using angry masculist ideas was able to put the European men’s lib movement on the media map in the 80s, until I dropped out of the movement once I saw that massive numbers of women were going into careers, so I became convinced that masculism was no longer needed, because the feminists were pushing women into careers.

So for 3 decades I ignored masculism, until I heard a Sandman YouTube video and became conscious that the fluffie feminist hypocrites had taken over the divorce courts and made divorce so toxic for men that the MGTOWs came into existence as a reaction.

I then realized that masculist thinking was called for again. I also realized that these MGTOW kids, half my age, were strongly apolitical, a major error as I see it, so for the past few years I’ve been pushing masculism onto the world. I can’t do much else while I’m in China, other than making YouTube videos on masculist ideas and putting out links to them on dozens of other people’s videos in their comment sections.

I won’t be able to see how successful angry masculism can be in the 2010s until I leave the Chinese communistic dictatorship and live in a democratic country with (relative) freedom of speech such as Australia. (I say relative, because Australia has “hate speech” laws which make it illegal to criticize the hated Jewish banksters and their jaw dropping crimes against humanity. Australia also has YouTube which is now being censored by its CEO, who is a Jewish feminazi.)


Prof. Dr. Hugo de Garis

(YouTube channels) “de Garis Masculist MGTOW Flyers”  “de Garis Essays”

%d bloggers like this: