Political Correctness, Transhumanism, Misandry and Misogyny – All attacks on Nature but to what end?

In a time of universal deceit, speaking the truth becomes an act of rebellion.

George Orwell.

I recently came across this post,

“The fear is waning and the bravery to speak the truth growing. In the future this trait could become a clear litmus test for anyone who appoints himself as one of our countless “event interpreters”: do they have the courage to say what we all see clearly in front of our face? Or do they sputter and waffle and shy away and equivocate?”


He’s right. If now is not the time to express the facts as they appear to you, then when is it?

Misandry is a hatred of men. The rise of feminism is a manufactured manifestation of misandry.

It is as responsible as any form of social engineering for promoting division between men and women because that is its intent. It is a subject which has been written about in great depth elsewhere but, in the briefest of explanations, it can be traced from the rise of the Suffragettes, through the promotion of degenerate Cultural Marxism as exemplified by the state of the Weimar Republic, the rise of the ‘flapper’ in the 1930s, to the promotion of cigarette smoking as a form of liberation by Edward Bernays, to the rise of ‘women’s lib’ to the documented efforts of the Rockefeller foundation to get women out of the home and into the workplace where they could be taxed. All of which led to millions of children, as a matter of practice, being handed over by their parents to the ‘care’ of strangers working for the state apparatchik who were to be entrusted, without question, with the welfare and education of their offspring.

Expressed in these terms, we can see how it has worked to the detriment of all, particularly the younger generations and especially those who were born post 1960. Feminism is thus a form of social and psychological engineering.

Another form is transhumanism. Much of the transhumanist agenda has been inculcated by programmers such as H G Wells and Aldous Huxley in their influential writings like War of the Worlds and Brave New World.

As a metaphor for social engineering via transhumanism, Michael Crichton’s ‘Westworld’ is a powerful work of fiction. The HBO series Westworld (2016) blatantly promotes a transhumanist agenda whose final denouement is the obliteration of ‘humans’ by androids, that have been created by the Anthony Hopkins character and his brother. Throughout its laborious 10 episodes, it relentlessly promotes the view that artificial intelligence is the means through which mankind can be improved. As such it is an anti-nature vehicle that promulgates the false view that man has been not been divinely created by the creator but is rather a creature that has built in imperfections that need fixing by the use of artificial intelligence/computer programming. It a series which promotes the insipid belief that mankind is fatally flawed and that androids are more perfect forms whose consciousness is ‘evolving’ via tweaks and adjustments to their programming.

Westworld (2016) – transhumanist propaganda.

Frequent and excessive violence is used throughout, with the overt message being that through extreme adversity, the consciousness of the androids increases.  Order comes out of chaos, as the older model androids develop consciousness and memory.

However, being based in fallacy and founded on false scientific notions that go against nature (or God) Westworld is itself fatally flawed. How? Given the fact that most of Mankind’s brain is taken up with the functioning of our sense of vision and that it is so complex, Artificial Intelligence scientists and technicians have found it impossible to produce robots that are capable of seeing, the entire premise that the Hopkins’ character has been able to manufacture fully functioning robots falls into smithereens. It is literally science fiction. In other words,  fake science is the false premise on which the entire series is founded. And that is stated without any consideration to the other senses or how one could create humanoids that are capable of experiencing ‘human’ emotions in the ranges the robots seemingly have, let alone the claim that they are some how ‘conscious’. Westworld is thus nothing less than transhumanist programming.

Feminism is also another form of programming, of a sort that is also anti-nature, even anti-christ (as in against consciousness). Nature may be ‘tamed’ by man when he works in harmony with her powers (gardening is a fine example, as is canal building, or even an invention like the bicycle) but nature will always ultimately triumph and mankind would do well to remember that fact at all times. What feminism does is discount the nature of Mankind and, as such, it is an affront to the natural law to which we are all subject. There is no one between the individual and Nature/God/his maker. Any ‘person’ or entity which imposes itself between him is anti-nature. The natural law to which we are all inextricably attached may be distilled to what is sometimes referred to as the Golden Rule: treat others as you would have them treat you. Or more bluntly, Do no harm, take no shit.

Given the foregoing, the image below may be taken as anti-nature.

What the fuck is she on about?

The feminist with the placard is, as far as RM can see, a fuckwit. What on earth does she purport to be doing? Encouraging men to think less? To feel more? Moreover, who in their right mind is likely to listen to her? What does she mean by ‘straight white men’? Is she mentally ill? In any event, she is farting into the wind and her smug expression belies a head that will one day explode like a pumpkin lantern that has a stick of dynamite burning inside it. Is she causing harm?  Only to those who are foolish enough to take her seriously.

RM suspects she may be one of those fake Social Justice Warriors (SJW) who erroneously believes that ‘straight white men’ are somehow the problem causing the world’s ills. With skewed thinking like that, she would be out of her depth in a puddle and, moreover, she is labouring under a form of misandry, the hatred of males. Misandry and misogyny are two sides of the same coin.

Speaking of the cerebrally challenged, the kind of man who may take her seriously is sometimes referred to as a ‘blue pill’ male. This type is characterised by a form of emasculated programming that results in the individual buying into all manner of cultural collectivist thinking. He swallows his blue pill and chooses the route of conformity and least resistance, seemingly so incapable of critical thinking and low on testosterone that he falls prey to all those who seek to control him and/or oppress him.

What is wrong with that, one might well ask? It is wrong because it goes against the nature of man which is to look outward, weigh up his situation and take action. The individual who does that will soon come to the realisation that he is not free, as he once mistakenly believed. Such individuals ‘go along to get along’ – they do not challenge authority, they form part of the ‘pay and obey’ mindset and lead themselves wide open to the manipulations of others. Whereas, the warrior does no harm but is aware of his inherent and natural right to self defence. The warrior takes no shit. The warrior does what is right. The warrior is brave enough to take the red pill.

How many warriors are there in the image below?

A gaggle of manginas.

You can count them on no fingers. Presumably, the woman in the previous image would applaud the stance of these emasculated ‘men’ who are similarly anti-nature. What on earth is going through their minds? It is a sad image that reflects the deleterious effects of feminism and an education system that has utterly failed them; as was its intention all along.

These males are like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Little wonder that, as a counter balance to all this Cultural Marxist claptrap, we are witnessing the rise of the so-called ‘Men’s Rights Movement’, with its various offshoots.  When nature is out of balance, equity must be restored. What the fuck does the slogan even mean – ‘the future is female’?  It is empty rhetoric, just like the previous photograph, adding up to nothing. Throw into the mix the LGTBSG (or whatever it is called today) psyop and where is mankind heading?

RM would posit that, in reality, it is going towards greater freedom and that all of these fuckwits are hastening their own demise, their heads have gone, their thinking is like a lump of holy Swiss Cheese, their brains filled to the brim with half-baked notions of non-sensical political correctness, misguided whimsy and their balls shrunk to the size of raisins.

Back in the nineteen nineties, RM would jokingly state that he was a feminist, as it was the ‘only way to pull the chicks’. Like many of his generation, he had swallowed a load of Cultural Marxist engineering guff but part of him, at least, saw it exactly for what it was. Of course, being built on falsehoods, this programming, in the long term, was destined to break down. Which it did.

From the age of 16 to 18, RM was regularly inspired by a man called Michael Gillard, his A-level English teacher. A striking individual who stood at 6ft 3’, with a penchant for the dramatic and a love of language and literature shared by the young RM, he once told the class of a maxim which has stuck with RM ever since –

a young man can be forgiven for falling for the mental traps of socialism or some other collectivist philosophy, because he has a heart and wishes for fairness for all. If he has not dropped these false notions in later life, the same man has ‘no head’ and has failed to learn from his life’s experiences.

Whilst RM would have preferred to have been provided with a system of education that more thoroughly instilled in him the ability to think critically, that used the trivium and encouraged him to go his own way, such a path was simply not available to him or his cohorts in 1980s Huddersfield. Nevertheless, RM was always aware of the power inherent in language. Were it the case that language had no effect, then the efforts of the Tavistock Institute via Aldous Huxley would amount to nothing, as would all the works of whoever Shakespeare was, the oral traditions of the ancient British peoples, George Orwell and all those word-magicians who have worked their spells and cast their webs far and wide through the propagation of their words. As neatly expressed by Kevin Cole, all of it, as ever,  is about,

 “The use of language to create new realities”

What has become ever clearer over the course of time is this: when faced with a tyrannical system and its unthinking and compliant foot soldiers, a man, if he is a man, must take action. He will not look to go along with the tyranny for he knows all too well that if he does not stand under what is right, and gives up any of his freedoms for the illusions of peace and security, he will end up with none.

All those Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) who suck on the teat of the blue pill of systemic state propaganda will be faced with oblivion for they are going against nature. Such men are a danger to themselves for the simple reason that compliance breeds a prison for the mind, the beneficiaries of which are those who would seek to control them.

A man who is able to combine his gut instincts with his capacity for critical thinking/discernment is a man to be reckoned with for such a man is the culmination of his entire ancestral heritage.

Woe betide him if these faculties are clouded, obfuscated to the point of closure by some form of social engineering that has emasculated him. That man is a pussy in the sense that ne’er does he deal with the real issues of our times like the criminality of the banksters, the oppressions and deceptions of the Crown, the rigging of the judicial system or the effects of the Bread and Circus that manifests all around him. No, instead, he splashes around in a cess pit of irrelevance, speaking the false language of political correctness, even to the point of extolling the need for ‘women’s rights’ when it is the divine rights of Mankind as a whole that need trumpeting.

Such a man has become a shadow of what he could be and is as annoying and relevant as a fly that buzzes around in a room, bashing itself against the window, too dumb to go out of the gap and free itself from its confines. Little surprise to see the rise of the ‘Game’ and the Men’s Rights Movement, for nature abhors imbalance and it is only to be expected that to every form of oppression, there will be a corresponding response – after all, self defence is inherent in all aspects of sentient life and it rises by way of instinct. However, one wonders how many of these men are simply acting out the nerdish fantasy of being a stud, by way of their following of the Alpha Male players who command such large audiences across the Social Media. How many of them are really engaging with, for instance, the banking swindles that cause the genocide of their fellow indigenous peoples? How many are simply distracted by the question of into which vagina they will next be inserting their penis?

The divisive effects of feminism have led to the rise of such acronyms as ‘Men Going Their Own Way’ (MGTOW) which is supposed to be those men who have decided, quite reasonably, that the relationship game is simply one that is not worth playing. None of which is without its critics:

 @IllimitableMan 8m8 minutes ago

MGTOW is how men who view women as pathogenic cell invading viruses pretend they don’t want or need women in their lives.


The rise of the ‘Game’ whereby insights into the nature of women who have been brought up with a false sense of entitlement are  used for ‘pick up’ purposes (to get laid). The game players use well-established methods that tap into women’s biological and psychological natures in order to ‘bed’ them. Again, this is modus operandi is questionable:

 @IllimitableMan 10m10 minutes ago

“Pick up artistry is how men who view women as the most important thing in their lives make them a priority via lame as fuck gay tricks.”

Thus, one of the most invidious effects of feminism has been the division of the male and female into two camps – the ‘feministas’ and the ‘lone wolf’, or man going his own way. Both are ladened respectively with misandry and misogyny, which are but two sides of the same coin and neither serve Mankind (which is all of us, male and female).

As Jordan B Peterson so eloquently puts it:

“Dividing our civilisation into polarised ideological camps of female group identity and male group identity is certainly not the answer. We have to be honest, male and female alike, about what we really want, as individuals, and talk it out. We know beyond dispute that societies who emancipate their women are much more productive and peaceful, and that the relationship is causal. Thus, it’s not a matter of if but how.”  source

It is, he argues, necessary to acknowledge the Divine Individual of the Male with the Divine Mother of the Female: this is where our responsibilities lie. The alternative is nihilism, from which nothing emerges.

“The divine individual is masculine because the feminine is not individual: The divine feminine is, instead, mother and child. However, it a hallmark of Christian supposition that the redemption of both men and women comes through the masculine, and that is because the masculine is the individual. The central realization – expressed dramatically; symbolically – is that the subordination of the group to the ideal of the Divine Individual is the answer to the paradox of nihilism and totalitarianism.

The Divine Individual is the man that every man admires, and the man whom all women want their men to be. The Divine Individual is the ideal from which deviations are punished by the group with contempt and disgrace and fidelity to which is rewarded with attention and honor. The Divine Individual is not the winner of any individual game but the player who plays fair and is therefore continually invited to play. The Divine Individual is the builder, maintainer and expander of the state, he who boldly goes where no man has gone before, and someone who eternally watches over the widows and the children. His power of direct and honest communication is that which identifies, discusses and resolves the continually emergent problems of human existence. He is the Savior of the World.

The primary image for women is not the Divine Individual, because of the heavy burden they bear for reproduction. It is, instead, the Divine Mother and Child. This is not to say that man is the Divine Individual, and woman is not, although such confusion is understandable, given the complexity of the problem. Men, like women, have the Divine Mother and Child as an element of their personality. In men, however, it’s in the background, so to speak, as the Divine Individual is in the background of the psyche for women. Men, by necessity, play a less primary role in the care of children. This frees them to act as individuals in a manner that up to now has been nearly impossible for women. Identification with these images is belief in them. Belief is not the statement of agreement with a set of facts, but the willingness to act something out, to become something, to stake your life on something. For men and women alike, this means voluntary adoption of responsibility – responsibility for oneself, family and state. In that responsibility, and not in rights, resides Meaning itself – the meaning that makes life bearable.” source

Such has been the attack on the family unit, on the very essence of and potential for gender harmony, that many children have been raised by their mothers only. This is deleterious to the well-being of all, but particularly boys, who grow up without a strong male presence and example.

Take another look at those men and that woman in the photographs and ask yourself, whether you are male or female, could any of these people be relied upon in a moment of crisis, in a battle, to stand shoulder to shoulder with you or to defend you in any meaningful way? It’s a good question for these are the times when we should choose our companions wisely, especially when psychological warfare is being waged upon us by our would-be controllers and fake news outlets (such as the BBC ) propagate the age-old divide and rule strategies.

In the meantime, here is an image to balance out the woe-begotten photographs used earlier:



Many thanks to all those who support the work at RM and especially to Rob and Anne U for their kind donations. Again, any reader who wishes to show his or her appreciation by way of a donation is encouraged to do so. Cheers.

As of January, 2016 comments are open... cheers!