Stephanie Russel Kraft on Male Supremacists

Stephanie Russel Kraft has an article on 'the Rise of Male Supremacist Groups' in the New Atlantic. Unfortunately, in her first paragraph, she focuses on 'lone wolf' mass-murderers who, clearly, had no need for the backing of any Group in order to perpetrate atrocities.

When Marc Lépine murdered 14 women at Montreal’s École Polytechnique in 1989, he claimed that he was “fighting feminism.” When Anders Breivik murdered 77 people in Norway in 2011, he was in large part motivated by his hatred of feminism, which he considered a poison and threat to the future of European men. And when Elliot Rodger killed six people in Isla Vista, California, in 2014, he said he did it to punish young women for rejecting him and sleeping with other men instead.

Lepine's father was an Algerian Muslim who had abused his wife and children. The boy seems to have had a mental illness and was socially isolated.

Brevik is some sort of Islamophobic Right Wing nutjob. He is too crazy to be a member of any group.
Elliot Rodger appears to be mentally ill. He first stabbed his three male room-mates, who like his mother, were of Asian descent, before setting off on his murder spree. He was not connected to any group.

Do Male Supremacist Groups actually exist? Sure they do! ISIS is one. Russel Kraft may have heard of it. Boko Haram is another. Such Groups can kill and rape and subjugate women on an industrial scale. There are many other similar Groups which traffic in women, some of whom are affiliated with Chauvinistic ideologies featuring Supremacist arguments relating to men of a specific creed or lineage.

Russel Kraft, however, is not concerned with such Groups. She wants to show that 'lone mad men' were actually all connected by the sort of occult network that informs paranoid ideation.

These massacres were painted as the acts of lone mad men, but they have a clear common thread: a desire to dominate women and a conviction that society oppresses men in favor of women.

Russel Kraft, though trained in Cultural Anthropology, has worked as a Law reporter. Is she saying that a prosecutor could have found a 'clear common thread' connecting the crimes of Lepine & Brevik & Rodger?

Consider atrocities committed by 'lone wolf' terrorists in the name of ISIS. There may be no tangible connection between them and that organisation. Nevertheless, there are websites and internet connections which show that a 'common thread' did indeed exist. We may feel that the State is justified in taking targeted action against what is not an individualistic type of crime, but rather a 'joint enterprise'

Can something similar be claimed about Levine, Brevik & Rodger?
Russel Kraft thinks so-

Those misogynistic beliefs, so depressingly familiar and widespread, have hardened into a more distinct force in recent years, and have been fueled by the election of Donald Trump and the resurrection of white supremacist groups in American political life.

Wow! Not only was there a common misogynistic thread and a joint enterprise against women, it 'has hardened into a more distinct force'.  Why? The election of Donald Trump has fuelled it. So has the resurrection of White Supremacist groups.

Should we expect an attempt at Taliban, or ISIS, or Boko Haram type subjugation of women?

Perhaps. Russel Kraft tells us that

the Southern Poverty Law Center added two male supremacist websites to its list of hate groups, for the first time categorizing male supremacy as an explicit ideology of hate.

Good to know! The Ku Klux Klan, of course, was purely matriarchal.

The ideology of male supremacy, according to the SPLC, represents all women as “genetically inferior, manipulative, and stupid” beings who exist primarily for their reproductive and sexual functions.

Revealed Religions may give rise to Ideologies. Literalist interpretations of such Religions can, I'm sorry to say, give rise to ideologies which hold the Father, or the Husband- or, in the case of Manu Smriti- even the Son, as the natural guardian of weak and fragile Woman.

Furthermore, any Ideology which is predicated upon violent struggle, will tend to valorise whichever grouping is perceived to be better at fighting. Still, this grouping may turn out to be female- as Ocalan found out- at least in defensive wars

Gender-essentializing male supremacists rely on cherry-picked science and anthropology to bolster their claims that men are inherently dominant. Not only do women owe men sex, they believe, but men are entitled to take it from them.

Supremacists of any description don't 'cherry pick' anything. They tell stupid, obvious, lies. But then so does every hack of any description whatsoever.
Russel Kraft has cherry picked some lone wolf mass murders and tied them up with a completely bogus 'common thread' so as to get in a dig at women who voted for Trump and who thus became responsible for 'fuelling' White Supremacists who will come and rape us any day now.

Why? Because gay little Milo, or the hairy Persian, Daryush, or 'the Gloria Steinem of the Men's Movement' Paul Elam, told them to.
No doubt, a certain sort of homosexual might find Milo persuasive and hairy, gold medallion, types might like the Roosh, but what sort of man wants to listen to the 'Gloria Steinem' of the Loser's Movement?
Such people may say something sarky about one's outfit but are women really supposed to be afraid that they'll morph into ISIS?

Russel Kraft doesn't say so but she is clearly worried. Why? The Liberal Media, appalled by Trump's victory, are giving the oxygen of publicity to a bunch of sad little wankers.

Though the aftermath of the 2016 election has brought public attention to these hate groups, they have been festering for years.

No doubt they were festering. But they had no power at all. 2008 was the year we were supposed to get the first Female Leader of the Free World. Obama put paid to that. Still, 2016 was a sure thing.

Sadly, enough women voted for Trump to put him in the Oval Office. Feminism had a credible, highly qualified, candidate for the top job, but many women turned out not to be feminists at all. They voted for a 'pussy grabber' who spoke of restoring blue collar jobs in traditionally male industries.

The question is- why?

Russel Kraft has a theory-

Male supremacist groups have been provoked in large part by feminist gains, which is especially relevant at a time when women in the United States are speaking up more loudly about sexual violence, barriers to institutional power, the persistent pay gap, and other forms of structural oppression. They have their roots in the 1970s, when the women’s movement began to deconstruct the concept of gender. “I think that was a huge change and it did provoke enormous backlash,” said Linda Gordon, professor of history at New York University.

Many Whites- not necessarily Supremacists at all- didn't like Obama but re-elected him anyway. Where was the 'White backlash' against the rise and rise of African Americans? The answer is not far to seek. Highly discriminatory policing and judicial sentencing was the price most Black people paid for the success of their 'talented tenth'.
The Male backlash against gains women made under Second Wave Feminism was similarly muted because everybody could see that most women were having to work longer for less while shouldering more of the parenting burden then ever before in history. At one time there was a belief in 'Welfare Queens' and Alimony Empresses- but we all quickly realized the thing was just clickbait. Women aren't getting rich divorcing their hard working husbands in order to live the life of Riley. Women get the short end of the stick and end up with a much lower share of Wealth. But only in the West. In Saudi Arabia, over the same period, Wealth distribution shifted in favour of women.

Did the women's movement 'deconstruct' the concept of gender? Surely 'deconstruction' was invented by male academics whom all other male academics quickly dismissed as tossers?

What women had previously done was show excellence in every field of socially utile activity. That was an empirical refutation- not some bogus 'deconstruction'- of every tenet of Male Supremacist thinking.  What's more, Second Wave Feminism in America used the law in creative ways- e.g. Title 9 jurisprudence- to 'level the playing field' in a manner which even the most bigoted male must admit has been enormously beneficial to society.

Stupid people might identify crazy, paranoid, Third Wave Feminism- which consisted of bitching about women who had gotten things done that benefited everybody- with actual Women, working hard for themselves and their families and achieving a great deal of good for everybody else in the process.

Russel Kraft admits as much-

A recent Voice for Men article on the history of feminism tells the same story. Until the 1970s, the author writes, feminists “didn’t have much impact on mainstream culture.” Before second-wave feminism, “America was a happy place.” These new feminists, he writes, were “angry, extremist militants who zeroed in on America’s post-war relaxation to begin an uprising built on hysterical and irrational logic that would shake the Western world.”

The nutter who wrote this garbage believes that some new type of Feminism in the Seventies 'shook the Western World'.  Nothing of the sort occurred. What actually happened was that Women turned their backs on crazy nutjobs because every woman can be as crazy a nutjob as Shulamith Firestone. There can be no Fuehrer, where everyone can spout an even more virulent strain of stupid shite.
The Women's movement could not become a virus dangerous to the commonweal because almost every woman is inoculated against it from birth. Victimhood and the joys of passive aggression are tools to be used against the more infantile sex because you'll have to change their nappies anyway- whether they shit themselves from sympathy or resentment.

Russel Kraft says that many feminists are as fucked in the head as male suprmacists. Both think there was some 'revolutionary turning point' when all that happened in the early Seventies was that some nutters freaked out and shat the bed.

What is seen among many feminists as a revolutionary turning point is, for male supremacists, the beginning of the end. According to Alex DiBranco, a Ph.D. candidate in sociology at Yale University who has studied male supremacist groups, these ideologies began to consolidate and institutionalize in the 1990s, in response to campus anti-rape activism, the Anita Hill controversy, and the rise of Hillary Clinton. As women have made greater gains, real and imagined, these groups have grown. “When they see women making advances, that’s something they can mobilize off of,” DiBranco said.

Ph.D candidates in Sociology are bound to be as stupid as shit. Why publicise their moronic jabber? Older people like me remember the Reagan years while younger people have probably read Susan Faludi. The fact is Geraldine Ferraro's political demise, after her Vice Presidential bid in '84, had put paid to 'Male Supremacists'' fears. The 'backlash' won. Hillary will go down in History as a 'stand by your man' First Lady. Anita Hill was crushed by the system. The Nineties and the Oughties carried on a Reaganite theme of Frat-boys being Frat-boys, when they weren't busy aping the rappers whose enlightened attitude to 'bitches' soon became normative. In the early Seventies, Hollywood convention was that sodomy was off the table. By the mid Nineties it was something a liberated woman was supposed to do. By the mid Oughties, not going ass to mouth on your first date was a faux pas comparable only to not getting a Brazilian. I should know. If memory serves, I spent that decade as a Vampire Slaying High School cheerleader. Since then, like many adversely affected by the sub-prime crash, I've spent my time as a hot-shot attorney who was bitten by a werewolf. Thus, mine is an emic perspective of American Feminism. Russell Kraft, I fear, because of her German alma mater, has a distorted, for etic, view of what I admit is her, not my, country of domicile.

American feminism is far too important to leave to American females who might go and re-elect Trump and thus further fuel the rise of an American Boko Haram armed with nuclear weapons. I suggest that elderly Brahman men, like myself, be placed in charge of this vital ideology.