Daphne Patai author of Heterophobia;

"Sexuality is not private, but is political and related to power. 'Compulsory heterosexuality' is part of a power structure benefiting heterosexual males at the expense of women and homosexuals. This inequity is justified by an ideology that sees heterosexuality as natural, universal and biologically necessary and homosexuality as the opposite. The system also is reinforced by legal sanctions and violence against women (rape, battering, incest, and murder) and against lesbians, gays, and transgendered persons (verbal harassment, physical assault and murder)." This is the definition of heterosexuality that has found its way into a standard reference work by a major publisher!"

"I've documented many, many cases of what sound like lunatic statements made by feminists about the unnaturalness of heterosexuality. Some of the more mellow people say you can't blame a woman for having been heterosexual in the past, because after all she was trained to it, but now that she hears what we have to say, she certainly is responsible for the decisions she makes in the future. So, in other words, heterosexuality is obviously not the thing she should be choosing."

"I conclude from all of this, that there is antagonism to heterosexuality within the women's movement. Now, this isn't news. It's just that feminists have spent so much time pretending this isn't true and insisting that the accusations against them of "male bashing" was just backlash against feminists."

"They claim it's a misrepresentation of feminism, but it's not a misrepresentation. As someone who spent 10 years in women's studies, I know that male bashing has always been a very important part of feminism."

"This mindset, which has shaped so much public discourse today, has found its way into law. I call it feminist extremism. The language used by feminist extremists has become so ubiquitous that it is very difficult for reasonable people to frame arguments in something other than that language."DP

GYNOCIDE: : the idea that men create a social system where women live entirely as instruments of men’s interests.

Thus the word gynocide just becomes another tool to diss men.

Human mating

A buyers' market
Dec 13th 2007
From The Economist print edition

Men propose; women dispose

WOMEN often complain that dating is like a cattle market, and a paper just published in Biology Letters by Thomas Pollet and Daniel Nettle of Newcastle University, in England, suggests they are right. They have little cause for complaint, however, because the paper also suggests that in this particular market, it is women who are the buyers.
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10283290

I think this research kind of puts a really big dint in the Gynocide arguement.

Lev,
The author describes herself as being a feminist and not a “radical” feminist. In the article she makes generalised statements about the male gender, and discriminates and vilifies the male gender, but there are very few feminists who do not.

Try finding some document written by a feminists that says something positive about the male gender.

There are about 0.04% of males who carry out sexual abuse of children (of both boys and girls), and from that we are supposed to assume that we live in a gynocide society.

I suppose the weather in Canberra is representative of all parts of Australia also.

Country Gal,
I’m surprised feminist cult members have not complained by your intended use of domestic violence against your spouse.

“my opinion is no less valuable than my husbands, and if he disagree's, I'll withdraw his allowance!.”

Withdrawing funds or an “allowance” from a spouse if they did not agree with you is a form of financial violence, but feminist cult members normally say they that they do not believe in any form of domestic violence.

Or maybe it is all a sham, and in reality, feminist cult members only oppose domestic violence when carried out by a male towards a female.

Happy New Year to all.

HRS, Col Rouge and others, hope you keep up the good work.

Country Gal

HRS is right when he point out the withdrawing your husbands allownace is classified as domestic violence, however unlike HRS I do not assume that the allowance you are with holding is financial, it is perhaps withdrawing sex, or affection.

So basically it is sexual and/or emotional and psychological abuse, because your husband doesn't agree with you.

It was written that if women only had sex with men who walked on their hands, pretty soon almost half the world would be walking around on their hands. So withdrawing sex and affection will bring the most stubborn recalcitrant male to heel, most of the time.

James H,
I wish you a happy new year also.

I was surprised that the author herself did not comment about Country Gal’s intention to carry out domestic violence against her spouse.

The violence of feminism is not greatly physical, but involves distortion of information and the discrimination and vilification of 50% of the population.

To educate someone from pre-school to PhD level would possibly cost the taxpayer between $100,000 to $200,000 (or more), and for this the taxpayer gets someone who distorts information and attempts to discriminate and vilify 50% of the population.

That person is then excused by other feminists as being a “radical” feminist.

However universities now want more money, so a reasonable question to ask is “To do what”?

HRS

I wonder what George Orwell would write about feminism today?

His book 'Animal Farm' was one of the books I studied at school ages ago. Little did I realise that that book is as relevant today, as the the day it was printed.

Even the introduction to Gynocide reminds me of the introduction in Animal Farm where it was claimed that men were the problem and getting rid of men would solve the problem.

Old Major claimed that men had a system that benefited them and not the animals.