Our friend Eivind Berge alerted us to the following comments made by the increasingly popular ‘femRA’ TyphonBlue 2 or 3 years back, and I thought it deserved highlighting as a post in itself, just to illustrate what kind of cancer the Men’s Rights Movement is allowing itself to be infected with.
The comments were made nearly 3 years ago when Eivind was ‘INCEL’ (involuntarily celibate). In response to another female commentator stating that Eivind was ‘fucking HOT’, TyphonBlue gave her own radical feminist take on Eivind’s sexual frustration :
IMHO it sounds like he’s processing (badly) some sort of overwhelming sexual trauma from his past. I’m not saying that disqualifies him from being hot, but likely off-limits for the duration.
Now if, for example, the militant atheism movement was being accused of racism for describing the Koran as a work of superstition, they might be tempted to embrace some dark skinned ‘apostates’ into their ranks – former Muslims who had renounced their previous faith and now fervently claimed that all religions are evil backward nonsense. Atheists might even be tempted to give such apostates a high profile within their movement, perhaps more than they deserve by merit, truth be told, simply in order to deflect any accusations of racism against Muslims and possible links to White Nationalism or other ‘hate groups’ (through illustrating that Muslims are not a race but followers of a belief system, and it is only the belief system that atheists have a problem with).
But whatever you think about the Militant Atheism movement, you can be pretty sure that they would have sufficient critical faculties to be able to smell that something was up if any of those born again atheists curiously appeared to hold on to one or two of their former radical Islamist ideas – such as that homosexuals will burn in eternal fire. Not only that, but if they held that the belief that homosexuals will burn in eternal fire should be a key assumption of atheism, and that atheists should raise money (including from Muslims) in order to devote more time to spreading the message that homosexuals will be condemned to eternal punishment (and that this promotes atheism and secularist ideals).
It appears that the men’s rights movement is a little different to the atheism movement.
Why would a femRA wish to validate the feminist child sex abuse industry and manufacture millions of fucked up male ‘victims’? Apart from the obvious well documented (here) reason why a middle-aged woman would wish to deny any possible challenge (from the growing MRM) to the key Sexual Trade Union agenda of child abuse hysteria, the following words of Typhonblue herself may shed a little light on the subject :
In “Women Do Not Benefit: The Science,” I outlined how toxic victimhood limits women and socializes them to undermine their own achievements. Toxic victimhood promotes the perception that women are “acted upon” rather than actors. When a society is promoting toxic victimhood, there is no need to limit women overtly through legal, financial or social restrictions. Instead women will limit themselves through their own mental foot-binding.