My issue with the discussion over male organizations is the acceptance, particularly in America, that coed institutions will automatically cater primarily to females.
Most girls who wanted to join the Boy Scouts wanted to get away from the sometimes excessive girly activities of the Girl Guides, they wanted the outdoor activities, not arts and crafts. I think the transition to coed scouting seems to have gone better in the UK because there was not the immediate demand for the feminization of the organization.
To some degree this is Reeves playing it safe, he accepts feminization as the default and tries to carve out places where males can be accommodated.
Exactly, reeves doesn't give two craps about real male issues, not really. He still accepts the gynocentric and for the past 70 years, feminist social order. Let's see advocate for true equality in all domains and an end to all female privilege in education and employment. When he does that, maybe I and other true male advocates will take his ass seriously.
Brooks doesn't help in any capacity because of he is an "elitist" Canadian cosmopolitan douchebag and more comfortable with people the right wing despises. Any advocacy from anything affiliated with the nyt is going to be soaked in this "elitist" horrible mindset. Now some asshole at the nyt talks about issues the manosphere has been talking about for years, and doing it under the eye of the gynocracy, has no value because it's disingenuous at best.
They even put the destruction of male spaces as a fucking good goal at the time while letting the worse ywca remain with their sex discrimination. Are they fucking braindead? Or are they the worst type of institutionalized simp who needs to bow down to fucking feminism to get the published in the dumpster fire know as the nyt?
My issue with the discussion over male organizations is the acceptance, particularly in America, that coed institutions will automatically cater primarily to females.
Most girls who wanted to join the Boy Scouts wanted to get away from the sometimes excessive girly activities of the Girl Guides, they wanted the outdoor activities, not arts and crafts. I think the transition to coed scouting seems to have gone better in the UK because there was not the immediate demand for the feminization of the organization.
To some degree this is Reeves playing it safe, he accepts feminization as the default and tries to carve out places where males can be accommodated.
Exactly, reeves doesn't give two craps about real male issues, not really. He still accepts the gynocentric and for the past 70 years, feminist social order. Let's see advocate for true equality in all domains and an end to all female privilege in education and employment. When he does that, maybe I and other true male advocates will take his ass seriously.
Brooks doesn't help in any capacity because of he is an "elitist" Canadian cosmopolitan douchebag and more comfortable with people the right wing despises. Any advocacy from anything affiliated with the nyt is going to be soaked in this "elitist" horrible mindset. Now some asshole at the nyt talks about issues the manosphere has been talking about for years, and doing it under the eye of the gynocracy, has no value because it's disingenuous at best.
They even put the destruction of male spaces as a fucking good goal at the time while letting the worse ywca remain with their sex discrimination. Are they fucking braindead? Or are they the worst type of institutionalized simp who needs to bow down to fucking feminism to get the published in the dumpster fire know as the nyt?