LEGALIZING MISANDRY by Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young
This is the second book in an apparent trilogy by these two authors, the first being the exquisitely recommendable SPREADING MISANDRY. Whereas that first book dealt with ubiquitous misandry (hatred of men) in all venues of pop culture throughout the 1990s, this book, LEGALIZING MISANDRY, examines in detail the sundry ways in which the Canadian and American judicial and law enforcement system, along with a complicit major media of course, unfairly vilify and persecute men via, as the title suggests, the legal system itself. Since this second book therefore sometimes deals with legislation and court practices and legalese, it is a bit harder to get through than their first book, but it is nevertheless well worth the effort and I eagerly anticipate obtaining their third installment which continues their uncovering of the general hatred against men in our culture, the only general hatred that is politically correct in our time.
The authors often document herein that the most acute critics of misandric feminism (what these authors call ideological feminism) sometimes come from their own ranks: it seems there are a few renegade feminists out there. They also show that, at bottom, when all the smokescreens are blown away, what ideological feminism really is all about is not only overall hatred of men, but also the inevitable, concomitant promotion of lesbianism. It is about time somebody from academia said that. Actually, Nathanson and Young give credit to feminist Daphne Patai for saying it! Kudos to Ms. Patai.
The statistics these authors give are often shocking. They challenge mainstream misandric gender assumptions repeatedly, and sometimes they demonstrate that the statistics the mainstream media is using–taken unquestioningly from this or that misandrist whom they also take unquestioningly to be a respected “women’s advocate”–oftentimes these statistics which promote ideological feminism and bash men at the same time turn out later to be have been flat-out hoaxes or lies. And yet that still doesn’t stop the courts and media from continuing to use these bogus statistics.
The insights these authors come up with regarding the roles of men and women in a healthy society, as opposed to our sick society, are incisive and desperately needed in our culture. They demolish the misandric dogma of ideological feminism which propagandizes that violent men are the result of men who have been too empowered. Actually, the truth is the complete opposite, as these authors more than explain: men in fact grow more violent when they are disempowered and threatened with emasculation, which is of course the raison d’etre of ideological feminism.
This book is extremely valuable and I could go on and on about what a rare and meritorious service these authors are performing. To understand the plight of men today, and the horrible destruction that ideological feminism causes, there are probably not very many sources of information on the entire planet more worthy and important than this.
I do have one criticism of this book, though. Just one. But it’s not insignificant: The authors get off to a rocky start because they chose to begin by examining the Satanic Ritual Abuse phenomenon of the 1990s until now. Their idea was to show that this phenomenon was/is nothing more than an attack on men. Personally, I never got that impression, not even from the misandric major media, and I am still not convinced of that after having read what these authors have to say in support of this claim. But more to the problematic point: here these authors are writing about something of which they know nothing of much value because they are relying solely upon reports from the mainstream media. So naturally these authors come down on the side of the False Memory Foundation. Never mind that the False Memory Foundation is a shill organization designed to suppress the truth about Satanic Ritual Abuse. I really wish these authors hadn’t gone into this. They are not yet equipped (nor do most people ever equip themselves) to understand “the Pedophocracy,” as Dave MacGowan calls it. They needed to have read the work of authors already deprogrammed in this area; yes, authors such as Dave MacGowan, or William Ramsey, or Alex Constantine, etc., or else they should procure a suppressed book like THE FRANKLIN COVERUP to first deprogram themselves before tackling such a surreal subject as this.
Rating: Δ Δ Δ Δ