Anti-feminists cannot succeed without a leader with Mike Buchanan who has no moral authority

The dysgenic feminist State won't go away quietly and will only go when it is overthrown by men, not by women whose legs you like to film and slavishly agree with who need to go on courses. If Elizabeth Hobson were a man, would she get any kind of a job as Director of Communications? The fact that she is "resident anti-feminist on Radio Kent" says how harmless she is. Unmarried mothers are hardly going to call for the patriarchy to be restored and the only way to do that now in our "advanced" matriarchy is with Quran.com/24/2  Elizabeth won't be agreeing to be interviewed by me, will she?

It is interesting that when Elizabeth couldn't be interviewed by Piers Morgan and Mike Buchanan said he was prepared to stand in for her, he was refused. A dysgenic feminist state prefers the young to the old, the female to the male, the inarticulate to the articulate, the irrelevant to the relevant, all because she has good legs. Anti-feminism won't be taken seriously until and unless alpha male leaders take charge and stop hiding behind women. Mike Buchanan was born beta and will always be perceived as beta by women and men.

INSTEAD OF CALLING FOR THE ABOLITION OF NO FAULT DIVORCE, THESE ANTI-FEMINISTS WANT TO BAN MALE CIRCUMCISION AS A DOG WHISTLE TO ANTI-IMMIGRATION AND UNEMPLOYABLE ISLAMOPHOBIC AND ANTISEMITIC BETA MALES OUR DYSGENIC FEMINIST STATE HAS CREATED AND MARGINALISED

So what are the solutions she advocates? Banning male circumcision in an egregious display of antisemitism and Islamophobia? Does she even call for the restoration of the patriarchy?

Many people see these protestations are just a cover. That matriarchal Iceland is seeking to ban circumcision is a clear implicit display of hostility towards Jews and Muslims. Deny it all you like, but you will never be able to disprove that impression.

https://www.thejc.com/comment/comment/circumcision-is-at-the-heart-of-jewish-identity-1.53320

The term for circumcision in Hebrew – brit mila – “a covenant by circumcision”– emphasises that it is this covenant which created the Jews a nation, by Abraham’s acceptance of circumcision on behalf of his yet-unborn descendants. Even non-observant Jews who do not take the biblical story seriously, accept that for Jews, for at least two millennia, circumcision was the one indispensable commandment that makes one a Jew – not living in the Jewish homeland, obeying other commandments, or anything else.

To ban circumcision, to ban joining the covenant, the rabbinical court and many Jews fear, would be (however unintentionally) to ban Jewish national identity itself.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/iceland-male-circumcision-ban-religious-leaders-outrage-mp-bill-proposed-a8217696.html

Iceland male circumcision ban: MP behind plan 'didn’t think it was necessary to consult' Jewish and Muslim groups, amid growing anger

'I don’t see it as a religious matter,' insists Silja Dögg Gunnarsdóttir, a female MP. 

The matriarchy of Iceland understandably feel threatened by the patriarchal moral values Judaism and Islam represent.

https://www.fatherly.com/love-money/relationships/why-iceland-has-so-many-babies-born-out-of-wedlock/

In 2014, 70.5 percent of Icelandic babies were born to parents who hadn’t bothered to tie the knot.

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20130526/focus/focus3.html

Over 80 per cent of Jamaican children are born out of wedlock.

http://rightwingnews.com/top-news/ann-coulter-on-single-mothers-the-statistics-from-guilty/

By 1996, 70 percent of inmates in state juvenile detention centers serving long-term sentences were raised by single mothers. Seventy-two percent of juvenile murderers and 60 percent of rapists come from single-mother homes. Seventy percent of teenage births, dropouts, suicides, runaways, juvenile delinquents, and child murderers involve children raised by single mothers. Girls raised without fathers are more sexually promiscuous and more likely to end up divorced. A 1990 study by the Progressive Policy Institute showed that after controlling for single motherhood, the difference between black and white crime rates disappeared.

It is so obvious that gentile non-Muslims cannot compete against Jews and Muslim immigrants in their own homelands. This pointless show of implicit antisemitism and Islamophobia will get you nowhere. In fact, it is just a waste of time and energy and is indeed a form of displacement activity. If you are against feminism, restore the patriarchy. Since Elizabeth Hobson is herself an unmarried mother, it would be like expecting turkeys to vote for Christmas.


SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY FEMINISM

Has Elizabeth Hobson articulated any solutions to the problems caused by feminism? I hope someone will attempt to answer this question if she and Mike Buchanan do not.



GENUINE LEADERSHIP AND MORAL AUTHORITY IS REQUIRED FOR RESTORING THE PATRIARCHY

You will never be able to successfully challenge feminism without restoring the patriarchy. How sad that the men who wish to challenge feminism are no longer even capable of conceiving of the idea of restoring the patriarchy.

The only way to restore the patriarchy is of course to reconsecrate marriage.

Marriage cannot be reconsecrated by a Directrix of Communications who is herself an unashamed unmarried mother who cannot see the point of marriage, can it?

Or by a leader who refuses to talk about supporting marriage - the indispensable ingredient of patriarchy.

The reason why you dare not talk about restoring the patriarchy is because you already know that men who already have been the victims of feminism - including Mike Buchanan himself - are in fact unmarriageable. The more you continue to hide behind women who do not respect marriage, the more morally compromised you become and the less moral authority you will have.

Leadership is everything about moral authority, but the concept seems to be entirely lost amongst male political activists.

The role of parental advice in the avoidance of spinsterhood and illegitimate grandchildren

I know too many single women who never intended to be single but have found themselves, for one reason or another, without a man and unable to become a wife and mother.

A cartoon of a career woman saying: "Eeek! I forgot to have children!" is telling, funny and sad.

Yet, when one tries to address this issue, one is accused of giving ignorant "mumsy" advice, ie the advice that all women should make a point of finding a decent man who might be induced to marry them by the time they are 25.

No doubt if I had given this advice to these now single women in their late 30s when they were in their 20s they would all have told me to mind my own business!

I doubt if the mothers of these women would have given any such advice anyway. Most mothers have, to my knowledge, not been giving their daughters advice of any sort for several decades.

Why is that, I wonder?

Is it because they think all the rules have changed and that their advice would be considered old-fashioned, irrelevant and be ignored?

I think I can see why. Just pointing out that the existence and ticking of biological clocks, despite feminism and the advances of medical science, and the consequences thereof, has been found to be so incredibly offensive that an angry single woman in her late 30s has called me "vile", "narrow", "ignorant".

She asked: "Do you want me and all the other numerous women in my/similar position to kaibosh a man into having a child?"

Why, yes, of course! That is what women have been doing since the Fall of Man. Some of us do with greater subtlety than others. The ones who do it best are the ones who let the man think that the idea was all theirs. Sooner or later, our husbands will turn and say that we have changed, and that we tricked them into marriage and that they were fools to marry the shrews, nags and termagants we subsequently became, but that is their misfortune.

Anyway, it doesn't matter how you do it as long as it is done.

Parenthood is a life-changing and attitude-transforming experience, for with it comes the responsibility of being responsible for another person's life. This is so if you take it seriously, as an investment and as a distillation of all that you might have learnt that could be worth passing on.

It is NOT, as I have been trying to point out, about treating our children as pets, or giving them unconditional love.

What is it about parents these days that most do no such thing and do not even see it as their role to guide their children away from heartache and regret by some act of commission or omission?

How strange it is that moral authority is something the modern parent no longer sees as his or her role. Of course you cannot force anyone to listen to you if they do not wish to, but it is odd that no one even goes so far as to put themselves in a position to be able to say later: "I told you so". There is no need of course to go so far as to tell them that you told them so, but the option should be available.

It is the least we can do to discharge our duty to those we care about, by telling them so, even if they will not listen, when the situation remains capable of being remedied.