Nigel Evans, a Conservative member of parliament, has become the latest high profile figure to be cleared of serious sexual allegations. The British police, acting under the guidance and control of feminists in the abuse industry, and ultimately Keir Starmer and then Alison Saunders in their roles as the Chief Prosecuter, charged Nigel Evans with rape and assault charges for making a pass at another man who did not even consider himself a victim, as well as for 'raping' another homosexual man who had climbed into bed with him naked. It appears that at last there is a backlash against the CPS witch hunts on the horizon, with the possibility of Alison Saunders being forced to resign, both her and Keir Starmers being sued, or even hopefully prosecuted and caged.


Attorney General faces demands to launch a review into the way sex offence cases are carried out following acquittal of Nigel Evans.

There were calls for an urgent review of the way sexual offences are prosecuted after former Deputy Speaker Nigel Evans was cleared of rape and sexual assault, ending “11-months of hell”.

The 56-year-old Ribble Valley MP, who resigned the Conservative Whip last year after being charged, had been accused of a string of sex attacks against seven young men between 2002 and 2009.

The charges threatened to wreck the career of a man who has been in Westminster for 22-years and is one of the most widely respected members of the House.

But after a four week trial, in which the jury heard three of the alleged victims describe how they did not believe any crime had been committed, Mr Evans was found not guilty of all charges.

The jury took just four and half hours to acquit Mr Evans, who sobbed in the dock as he was told he was free to go.....

.... Last night former Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said the Attorney General should launch an urgent review of how the CPS prosecuted sexual offences.

He said: “This case has highlighted serious concerns over how the police and the Crown Prosecution Service bring sexual offence cases to court. In particular we must now review the process whereby the police and the Crown Prosecution Service put together a large number of lesser, subsidiary cases in order to reinforce one serious case when prosecuting sexual offences.

“It is clear from the way that this case proceeded that there is a risk of a serious injustice being done to an innocent man, and I would call on the Attorney General to urgently review this issue."




A solution to the problem of underemployment among state flunkies was found by the state-subsidized NSPCC. Noting in its annual report that ‘child protection agencies’ were overwhelmed by the reporting of paedophilia which they and kindred paedohysterics had whipped up, and unable to pursue much beyond ‘emergency’ cases, the NSPCC urged that all ‘professionals who came into contact with children’ – hence “our whole public service infrastructure [of] teachers, nursery workers, police officers and nurses” -- should take on paedohysteria as a duty (D.Telegraph, 31 iii).

{Whether this work would happily distract the attention of overpaid bureaucrats who ‘worked’ to ban smoking, branded cigarette packaging, electronic ‘smoking,’ drinking, fat, meat, sliced cheese, commas, crisps, ‘bogof’ supermarket offers, salt, sugar, smacking, ‘emotional cruelty’[as assessed by peecee social workers, with fat profits from disputes to lawyers]], porn, plastic bags, men, free poppadums, cars, coal, ‘unqualified’ sceptics about climate change, doughy pizzas and crispy chips [‘fries’] remained unclear. But it might lead more elderly paedophiles into inexpensive euthanasia rather than endure the form-filling for bureaucrats and the embarrassment of their families and friends before being slung into prison (£50Kpa) for torture by Blacks, Muslies and other self-righteous riff-raff....}


When 57-yr Christian John Craven preached from a Manchester soap box that the Bible condemned homosexuality (though not yags themselves), two boys in his audience started kissing to tease him and complained to police of ‘insult, harassment and distress.’ Peecee-trained cops forced Craven roughly into the cells, where they kept him for 15 hours without food, water or access to medication [for his rheumatoid arthritis]. Subsequently, after three years of wrangling, a court awarded the preacher £13K in compensation and £50K for his legal costs {sums to come out of the taxpayers’ pockets, of course} (D.Telegraph, 1 iv).


Unap leader Nige Garage, fresh from trouncing LibDim Cleggy on TV, made unexpected progress by realistically criticizing the West’s fooling around in the Ukraine and announcing his realistic + liberal belief that the ‘war on drugs’ had been lost {as any blind dog could have seen in 1965} and that drugs should be legalized and taxed – apparently a true national liberal in the making.


New statistics from HMG revealed that large parts of London’s East End were now majority-non-White. Barking & Dagenham now had 75% of its school pupils non-White – in one school it was 94%. This was a problem arising from the area’s 1990’s failure to follow the BNP; but at least, in 2014, it could be mentioned on the BBC’s Question Time without a riot (D.Mail, 5 iv, Robert Hardman), the cultural Marxists having won their battle to destroy the free-speaking, hard-working, fun-loving heartlands of British culture and now resting on their laurels and pretending they had never run peecee terror.


The Japanese government started funding matchmaking events in a desperate attempt to boost a birth rate that had halved over the past six decades (Bloomberg, 20 iii). Prime Minister Shinzo Abe allocated an additional 3 billion yen (£17.7 million) in the 2014 fiscal year’s budget for birthrate-boosting programmes as part of a strategy to reverse the nation’s shrinking population. Japan was home to one of the fastest ageing societies in the world, with the population shrinking at a record 244,000 in 2013 alone, according to government figures.The support of marriage - and the active encouragement of young people to settle down – had come to be regarded by government policy-makers as a key strategy for boosting the nation’s birth rate. {Could eugenics be far behind?}


The success of Third Wave Feminism has been so staggeringly successful in its rapid sweep over the globe, that it can only be compared to, or even considered as, an elemental force of nature. The great irony is that, motivated and driven by the effects of globalization and in particular the Internet in reducing the sexual power of women over men, feminism has responded by utilising those same forces to achieve a remarkable level of control over states, media, hearts and minds, across the world. And yet the medium of the Internet was supposed to be the liberator of (male) geek activism. Instead, it is well on the way to creating a global gynocracy in which it will be illegal even to criticise feminism.

For example, the website of 'UK Feminista', run almost single handedly by Kat Banyard, probably gets less than 1/10,000th of the traffic of the combined manosphere. But even including the recent efforts of mainly Canadian men's rights activists, Banyard and her small group have both attempted and achieved already far more than the entire resources of the manosphere have and likely will any time soon.

I don't want to discuss here the wider factors contributing to the success of Sexual Trade Union activism (but readers can if they want in the comments), and the obvious advantages feminists enjoy, just simply to note that feminist online organized actiivsm (leading also to offline activism) has been remarkably well-organized and effective and puts even the best efforts of us to shame.

In order to turn your fortunes around in a war in which you are currently losing, you have to learn from the enemy - adopt their tactics when it will work for you or work against them.

Fortunately, Kat Banyard has published the blueprint to her remarkable success. I would recommend every men's rights supporter and anti-feminist study the following guides carefully. You can download the tactics guides in pdf form at : http://ukfeminista.org.uk/take-action/toolkit/

Direct links to each PDF guide covering a particular topic :

How to Use Traditional Media

Setting Up a Feminist Group

Running an Effective Campaign

How to Use Social Media in Activism

Using Non-Violent Direct Activism*

How to Lose the Lad's Mag on Campus


I include the link to the fifth PDF file ('Using Non-Violent Direct Activism') only to highlight the tactics being employed by feminists in the UK. In the PDF file, Kat Banyard clearly encourages breaking of the law :


An occupation involves entering and holding a space or building.


Blockading involves preventing people or goods from entering or exiting an area or building.


a strike is a refusal to carry out work paid or unpaid.


Disruption involves temporarily or permanently preventing an activity such as a meeting or performance from taking place.

Civil disobedience:

Civil disobedience is the refusal to obey particular laws or commands from a government.

Banyard even runs 'Suffragette training camps' where she teaches other feminists how to engage in 'civil disobedience' (i.e. refusing to obey the law or commands from a government). The fact that she can do this openly without any fear of being arrested reveals the glorious irony of her supposed need to 'resist the government'. The fact is, feminists are not fighting against governments or state injustice, they are fighting to manipulate governments into artificially raising the sexual market price of themselves and other women (who share their demographic of ugliness). However, reduced female SMV is largely the result of technological progress and social change that even feminists and states are powerless to stop. But despite fighting a war that they can't ever win, feminist activism is remarkably effective in its influence, and puts to the shame the efforts of men who are fighting a battle that they can indeed win. We must learn from them.


Select the options below that apply to you

  • Prostitution and the payment for sex with a consenting female should be legal (88%, 43 Votes)
  • I regard the criminalization of male sexuality as one of the most important issues in anti-feminism (84%, 41 Votes)
  • I believe that male sexual attraction to teenage girls is natural and not 'hebophilia' (82%, 40 Votes)
  • I consider myself a regular reader of this site (i.e. visit at least once or twice a week) (76%, 37 Votes)
  • I regard the MHRM's validation of feminist definitions of sexual abuse to be an act of treachery (69%, 34 Votes)
  • I believe men must fight in every legal way possible against misandry (69%, 34 Votes)
  • I believe sex is something positive, and that casual sex can be positive (69%, 34 Votes)
  • I understand what the term paedocrite means (69%, 34 Votes)
  • The age of consent should be no higher than 14 (67%, 33 Votes)
  • I look forward to the day when men can be sexually independent of women if they desire to be (61%, 30 Votes)
  • I would describe myself as a men's rights activist (45%, 22 Votes)
  • I agree that feminists are rapists and will try to spread this as an anti-feminist meme. (41%, 20 Votes)

Total Voters: 49

Loading ... Loading ...


Actor James Franco has been shamed and forced to go on to a chat show to apologize for trying to pick up a 17 year old British girl. The age of consent in the UK is 16, and 17 in New York State where Franco lives. Despite relationships with 17 year olds being fully legal, feminist and MSM sites only just stopped short of accusing the actor of being a paedophile :



Last month, with the universal support of the MSM, the British Goverment officially cannonzied computer genius Alan Turing for taking a teenage (male) minor up the ass on multiple occasions, then trying to have the boy framed for a burglary that he had nothing to do with (probably because Turing feared the boy was going to report Turing to the police for abusing him).

This is how Jezebel describes a 35 year old heterosexual trying to pick up a legal 17 year old girl (and possibly not knowing she was 17) :

Anyway, from there, he tried to court her over Instagram and text. Which is fairly creepy because he is more than twice her age and she is still in high school.

This is how Jezebel describes Alan Turing, a 42 year old homosexual who repeatedly sodomized a 19 year old boy, then tried to have him arrested for a burglary he did not commit. The boy was still a minor at the time, and Turing was considered by both the law and the social norms of the day to be sexually abusing a child :

Turing, an important figure in the invention of modern computing, worked on code-breaking efforts during World War II. His reward: a 1952 conviction for "gross indecency" (i.e., homosexuality). Threatened with prison, he was forced into hormone treatments and committed suicide two years later.

Queen Elizabeth only just got around to issuing him a formal pardon.


A video of a French comedian peforming 'air sex' with unsuspecting women in public places has provoked outrage amongst femihags for 'glorifying rape' :



Why is gay marriage being forced upon society by the matriarchy? Homosexuals amount to only a small percentage of the population, and only a small percentage of homosexuals are interested in gay marriage. In Spain, gay marriage has been legal since 2005, yet only 22,000 gay marriages have taken place there. Assuming the liberal figure of 3.5% of the population being homosexual, then less than 3% of Spanish homosexuals have taken advantage of the law.. Even leading gay rights activist Peter Tatchell refused to call the legislation that came into effect in the UK this week as anything more than 'important'.

So why is the gynocratic liberal elite pushing gay marriage so hard, and giving it so much more importance than most homosexual men themselves feel that it deserves?

1/ Gay marriage, like gay, lesbian, and transgender rights in general, is being used as a mask of 'sexual tolerance' in order to hide the brutal legislative and cultural war being waged upon ordinary male sexuality by feminists world-wide. There are already a million men on the Sex Offender's Register - the modern version of the Pink Triangle' - in the USA alone. With the rash of anti-sex legislation coming out of EU directives, that figure is likely to be dwarfed in Europe in the coming decades. The irony is that there are probably already more homosexuals in prison and facing persecution under these feminist laws than there have ever been in the darkest days of 'homophobia'. There are probably fewer gays criminalized and imprisoned currently in 'homophobic' non-feminist Russia than there are in the 'liberal' paradise of Western Europe.

2/ Gay marriage is an attempt by the gynocracy to validate and enforce female sexual morality - or rather, female cavewoman evolutionary reproductive strategy - upon society. Traditional homosexual life style - cruising, casual sex, the love of youth - is male sexuality played out without the restrictive demands of female sexuality (and directed to other males rather than women). It's how most men would live their sexual lives if women did not exist. Women, however, due to their weaker nature and the facts of impregnation and child rearing, demand investment and committment. Traditionally, a woman's needs largely co-incided with the needs of society - the need for women to raise children and a male to stick around and provide for and protect them. In the post-sexual revolution society of today, however, sex has to a large extent been divorced from reproduction. Women may want to sleep around before marriage, have sex without the consequence of pregnancy, have a career before marriage, but they instinctively will never abide the idea of men sleeping around and chasing younger women. The problem is, how does the gynocracy combine the promotion of gay rights with the promotion of female sexuality in the era of the pill? The answer is gay marriage and the enforcement of female sexual morals upon homosexuals who have no need of them. Whatever you think of homosexuals, they are in a true sense naturally liberated from female sexuality. Gay marriage is simply womenkind co-opting homosexuals into their sexual value system.

Gay marriage allows feminists to continue to exploit homosexuals as a means to disguise a repressive war upon male sexuality, while further validating female sexual needs of committment as the norm even in a non-traditional secular society.