16 comments on “Al Franken Got What He Deserved For Being A Mangina Who Refused To Defend Himself

  1. really seems like it’s par for the course to dig up a woman that will lie about a man in politics or public life, and there is no shortage of women willing to do that.

    I’d laugh, but the thought of the million men already harmed by these tactics just makes me sad and angry again.

  2. Strange, that Franken felt compelled to resign, even if he was to be presumed innocent. This really is contradictory behaviour (just like stated in this blog post) and personally I think that it would usually mean, that the person in question is trying to hide something that is even worse than the accusations that have currently come into the daylight.

    Anyway, at least this clearly shows that Franken is a limp-wrist without a backbone (if he actually is innocent, that is).

  3. Winston Churchill famously said that an appeaser is someone who feeds a crocodile, hoping that it will eat him last. This is what many men are doing these days: appeasing the feminist crocodile, and hoping that they themselves are eaten last. They throw others under the bus of false allegations, hoping to save their own skin, only to find out that they will also be attacked eventually.

    This is also true in the grand scheme of things. The smarter feminists have long realized that they need to create a coalition of women of all races, religions, cultures and sexual orientations. This is what “intersectional feminism” is essentially about. BLM, for instance, the Slutwalk, the “Women’s March Toward Washington” and now the #MeToo-Campaign were full of, if not even lead by, non-white women.

    As a result, men have to increasingly defend themselves against ALL women AND against men of other races, religions, cultures and sexual orientations: evil gays, evil blacks, evil Jews, evil whitey. Men continue to blame other men for the bad actions of women. They even share the same rape hysteria! It’s just that they can’t quite agree on which kind of men poses the greatest danger: all men? White men? Muslim men? Gay men? It’s ridiculous! As men, as a social class, we will either hang together or hang separately.

      • There is already a fracture in the coalition. Probably started with the T in LGBT, trannies are really the turd in the feminist punch bowl, they may single handedly bring the entire thing crashing down.

        I am not sure I agree with gays becoming jaded with feminists but if anything it is the other way as your place in the victimhood totem pole gives you the commensurate power.
        Pornstar August Ames was bullied into committing suicide when she stated she doesnt want to do porn scenes with a guy who did gay porn.

        Her stance is not really anti gay at all. Perhaps she cant gel with a gay or bi guy the way she can with a straight guy. Even taking the HIV risk into consideration.
        But LGBT werent having it.

        Earlier this year, trannies were berating men for not liking chicks with dicks(how dare these men!) and now homos are hounding women for not having sex with them.

        Man, really my head is beginning to spin. This is just chaos and degradation all around. All this cant be good for anyone.

        Anything unsustainable and unnatural will collapse But the question is : how long and how much damage will be done in the meantime?

    • True that with the feminst crocodile. To me personally, I think a better analogy would be a spider. Too many men, like the manosphere, feed other men to the feminst female spider, hoping that it will give them sex and validation before eating them last.
      I read something by Barborasa taling about how Rossh V said he would rather go to Polish prison instead of denying himself of having sex with an underage hot woman in Poland. And as Barbarosa writes, he has the nerve to claim other men of giving up on life when in fact men like Roosh V have given up on life.
      I bet men like Roosh V would have sex with a woman even if he knew beforehand that after their mating ritual she would eat him and kill him.

      • I’ve noticed the same in all these incels circles lately. These “involuntarily celibate” men worship women up to a point where they almost deify them, and where female goddesses are then worshipped for alone being able to give the lives of mere mortal men meaning. And when you don’t find approval in the goddesses’ eyes, you can just as well kill yourself because there isn’t really anything other in life than seeking female approval. And if you disagree, you commit the heresy of “cope.”

        Some men are just utterly obsessed with finding female approval and are getting psychotically angry when they don’t find it. Ironically, preaching some MGTOW might even help a female here and there when it would prevent the next Elliot Rodger: guys who are simply so OBSESSED with finding female approval that it’s almost religious because only these female goddesses can give their grey lives meaning…

        • It is almost like you watched my latest youtube video lolol.

          BTW I made my blog private because I think it is crap, and I wasn’t happy with it, so I will not be accepting your request to see it, nothing personal. No one gets to see my blog.

          Female validation addicts are the reasons why the MRM and MGTOW are both dead. They just swamp in and kill the communities.

        • @tamerlame:

          What’s your YouTube channel?

          Or is that also private? Man, you’re really playing hard to get here, aren’t you?

        • “Hate week against the cultural Marxists”, “Cultural Marxism is Satanism”?
          Et tu, Brute? Or is that satire? It’s so hard to tell these days…

          As for Marxists being anti-male: everyone is anti-male except for those who are specifically pro-male; and sadly, those are few and far between. You can’t even say anymore that you only have to look at obscure corners of the internet to find pro-male voices since even these corners were largely taken over by tradcucks, fascists or, as in the case of non-white men, guys who sympathize with radical Islam which, in some ways, is the brown man’s alt-right in the West.

          So unless you want to burn down everything, what some parts of the far-right, those who sympathize with the Unabomber, believing that technology is the enemy (which reminds me that I once wrote a post about this: https://redshambhala3.wordpress.com/2017/08/04/technology-is-not-the-enemy/ ) would like to, you’ll just have to accept that you’ll have to navigate a lot of tradcucks and/or anti-male shit, whether it’s with Marxists, libertarians, conservatives, liberals, etc.

          Now as for Marxism specifically, I wouldn’t even have a problem with calling myself “third position”, it’s just that “third position” is usually just a euphemism for anti-technology, anti-civilization, racism, fetishization of being a farmer, anti-big-cities, pro-racism, pro-fertility cults, etc. etc., so I just stick with the Marxism. I get banned from leftists websites left and right, either because of my stance on feminism or because of my stance on open borders ( https://redshambhala3.wordpress.com/2017/08/15/what-does-such-a-race-want-with-high-wages-on-marxism-and-open-borders/ ) but so many of these people are at their core just “rainbow capitalists” and “rainbow imperialists” (US imperialism is OK as long as they have a black commander in chief and there are also female soldiers; and capitalism just needs less white men and more non-white men as CEOs, etc.). This is just identity politics capitalism … and so I’ll stick with the Marxism.

          What we colloquially call Marxism, Marx and Engels themselves called “historical materialism” anyway. Marxism has obviously an ethical dimension to it, looking at how monopolies are formed and how all capital being monopolized in the hands of a few affects those who do not own capital and so on, but it’s first and foremost about analyzing history and not about the working conditions of English coal miners. Criticizing Hegelian idealism, this whole idea of the “power of ideas”, they pointed out how history is not the struggle between great men on great horses or great philosophers with good versus bad philosophers with bad ideas etc., but class struggle.

          (The Protestant Reformation, for instance, didn’t happen because it took more than 1000 years for someone to finally realize that Catholicism didn’t have much to do with the Bible, but because new means of production were developed that then came into the hands of a class that had slowly gained more capital and independence in their guilds: the citizens in the free cities of the Holy Roman Empire. This class [new means of production -> new capital -> new power] then used Luther and Co. as their mouthpiece against another class: the aristocracy and the Catholic church that was attached to it and that claimed political power over them.)

          Realizing, that all serious sciences had at one time emancipated themselves from philosophy, whose once proud bag full of protoscientific goodies had been more and more emptied until nothing more than a pompous windbag full of claptrap and drivel remained, they wanted to do the same for the study of history: create an actual science with scientific hypotheses etc. (Obviously, they also believed in the existence of objective truth which is considered to be just another “social construct” these days). Whether you agree with if they’ve succeeded or not: they did NOT insist on the scientific nature of their method as a way to shield themselves from criticism, the way the term “science” is used these days (“You cannot disagree, this is not an opinion you stupid redneck, this is science!”). Sciences can obviously been adapted, developed, changed. The theory of evolution has also changed and adapted with new findigns etc. and Dawkin’s theory of a GENE-driven evolution is not the same as Darwin’s theory … simply, because Darwin didn’t know about genes what Dawkins can know today! So I don’t consider Marxism this religion you have to leave … their historical and anthropolical optimism were obviously their major flaws. Even Leninism already is an adaption, because Lenin said that class struggle itself will not so simply produce class consciousness the way Marx and Engels seemed to have predicted it, so he introduced this idea of an avantgarde and stressed this importance of having a party and a newspaper to instill class consciousness. Maybe Marx and Engels were simply wrong and equally wrong in their optimism about women. But I don’t think that this proves historical materialism itself to be wrong.

          Historical materialism, btw, also means that freedom has a material basis. “Fuck-you-money”, if you will. This whole debate about freedom of speech is often led very “idealistically” in the worst possible sense: but you cannot have freedom of speech or any other kind of freedom for that matter, without a material basis that gives you economic independence. All capital now becoming monopolized in the hands of a few US billionaires will inevitably result in no freedom. This is obviously important for men, and this is why I always say that we don’t need more freedom of speech but more power. Without this material basis, you can also not be free from women. (This is something the average American still understands better than the average European, btw.)

          Furthermore, I do not live a single-issue life and hence do not believe in single-issue struggles. Poor men who cannot afford all the healthcare they need and middle-class men who lash out at those who are even poorer, saying that we live in nanny states and welfare states and that our societies aren’t yet cruel and heartless and capitalist ENOUGH and that poor men should either pull themselves up by their own bootstrap or perish (or not live in the Western world anyway), are not so simply sitting in the same boat. So, I’m mostly interested in defending low-status men: poor men, gay men, non-white men, etc. I have zero interest in fighting “degenerate” men to increase the white birthrate in order to make white nationalists win the race war. I have zero interest in defending radical Islam which, in the West, often feels like the brown man’s alt-right to me.

          Finally, political differences between the sexes are, in some ways, greatly exaggerated anyway. If only white women in the US had voted in 2008, McCain and not Obama would have become President. If only white in the US had voted in 2012, Romney and not Obama would have become President. If only white women had voted in 2016, Trump would still be President. If only YOUNG white women had voted, Trump’s victory would have even been greater: https://i.imgur.com/eUhhuqQ.png

          Likewise, if only white men in France or Germany had voted, Macron and Merkel would still be President/Chancellor.

  4. This barrage of sexual assault allegations are too suspicious. I hate to bring up the cliche of the Salem witch trials but it seems that dark episode in history is embedded in the dark recesses of the American cultural DNA to re emerge periodically to devour and retire.

    • -except that now we’ve come full circle and the witches are hunting the men rather the other way around. IOW, if it’s a “witch hunt” why aren’t we hunting witches?

  5. Your analysis, as usual, is spot-on.

    I tend to think Franken is innocent (although we can’t discount the possiblity that Franken is Hugo Schwyzer lite) so this is really something that could be found in 1984 by George Orwell.

    The only evidence I’ve seen are a couple of dumb jokes and photos in poor taste… in which all parties were fully clothed. There might be more to this, and of course people might be running a rape-and-murder factory in the middle of a pizza restaurant, where the general public wanders in and out, at all hours. In a sane society, what might be speculated is a lot less important than what can be shown to have happened. It is only in the matriarchy where “feelings” trump evidence.


  6. Pingback: She Could Try Fighting Back Instead Of Whining | Freedom From The Gynocracy

  7. Pingback: Donald Trump Is A Weak Defender Of Due Process | Freedom From The Gynocracy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.