Hillary, destroying a city BUILT BY MEN
I sometimes lie awake at night imagining the eidritch horrors of a Trump presidency. Men’s Rights Redditors, by and large, seem pretty stoked by the possibility. No, what keeps them awake at night is the thought of Hillary Clinton behind the desk in the Oval Office.
In a post on the Men’s Rights subreddit yesterday, one Men’s Rightser asked his compatriots what they thought would happen to men — especially working class men — if (when?) Hillary wins in November.
“Hillary will destroy working-class males,” declared someone called Mens-Advocate.
“Suppression and demonization of males will continue unabated if not accelerate,” Maltreatments added.
“War with Russia and more suffering,” predicted DarthRedimo.
“Working class males will be sent to die in more neo-con wars while females stay home or at least off the front lines,” ThePigmanAgain warned.
The only place where Clinton will harm males and females equally is when it comes to being blown up by some lunatic Muslim pissed off at yet another sea of Arab blood being shed by the psycho in the white house.
As the Men’s Rights Redditor known as HQR3 sees it, Hillary Clinton will be even worse than the dreadfully misandrist Obama. Because Obama is only the tool of the feminist overladies; Hillary is one of the boss ladies herself.
“In gender terms, Obama is a lower level feminist,” HQR3 argues,
whereas Clinton is one of the feminist queen bees. Instead of having an intermediary like Valerie Jarrett relaying “suggestions” to the Oval Office, Hillary will be the originator of the feminist policies. And she knows precisely what to do.
And she’ll be really really sneaky about it, just like a woman:
Expect her first term in office not to have overt misandry, but rather she will indulge in extreme gynocentrism–e.g., women’s health, girls’ STEM education, women’s homelessness, PTSD among returning female vets, ad nauseam. … Don’t expect any overt misandry unless she wins a second term.
Here antimale stances will be subtle. While an Obama (or Biden, for that matter) would refuse (upon orders) not to meet with Warren Farrell, much less entertain the idea of WH Council on Men and Boys, Hillary would: she’d nod sympathetically, promise action, and dutifully deliver…an underfunded ($10M) council headed by Michael Kimmel, nagging boys into surrendering their masculinity.
To MRAs, the notion of Michael Kimmel, a feminist academic who writes regularly on masculinity, running a White House counsel on men is roughly akin to Adolf Hitler running a White House Hitler Club for Hitlers.
Other MRAs shared Trumpian nightmares of a country overwhelmed by immigrants. Someone called 4175 envisioned working class men facing
Depressed wages due to rush process of legalizing illegal immigrants … [M]en, particularly black men, coming out of prison will have basically no chance of getting work as millions of former illegals with “clean” records that started on day one of their citizenship, will be the easier hire.
Never mind that Hillary is pushing for reforms that would make it easier for those coming out of prison to get jobs.
Government jobs quickly become the best around through stability and wages, are now further dominated by women, especially with the huge difference in university degree rates which are a standard state/fed job requirement. Even worse will be direct pushes from white house for unequal woman-first hiring push in government in the afterglow of woman president election. Ripple effect lasts for generations.
Continuation of failed Rockefeller drug laws continue to ruin lower class male outcomes. Clinton made hay with being ‘tough on crime’ in the past, its an easy playbook to reach for again even in an era of decreasing crime rates.
Never mind that Hillary has called for the end of “racial profiling, and … racial disparities in sentencing,” as well as calling for “alternatives to incarceration, particularly for nonviolent and first-time offenders.” These things could drastically reduce the number of young black men wasting away in prison because of drug offenses.
Meanwhile, Trump has declared himself the “law and order candidate.” And decades before he decided to run for president, he famously took out a full-page ad in New York’s Daily News demanding the death penalty for the five teenagers — all of them black or hispanic — who were thought to have carried out the brutal rape and beating of a Central Park jogger. Turns out these then-kids were innocent; the real rapist confessed to one of the five in prison, and DNA evidence confirmed his story, after the now-adult five had spent a collective forty years in prison. Had Trump had his way they would have been killed at the hands of the state that had wrongly convicted them.
4175 was hardly the only Reddit MRA making up his own “facts” about Hillary.
“She’s on record officially supporting separate due process for women,” insisted Shammythefox, predicting “an administration that is very hostile to men.”
Of course Hillary supports no such thing. The claim seems to have come from a rather tendentious reading of an op-ed by the candidate discussing some of the unique problems faced by women in prison and their families, many of them stemming from the fact that mothers are far more likely than fathers to be the primary caregiver of their children.
This was, incidentally, the same op-ed in which she discussed the criminal justice reforms mentioned above — reforms that would benefit young black men most of all.
But never mind, because in the fever dreams of Men’s Rights Redditors, Hillary and the rest of the evil misandrists who run the world barely consider men to be human.
“[W]e’re on a slide to “pet”, then “object” (some are already there), and will end up at “pest” before things turn,” sniffed someone called rg57.
Still, not every Men’s Rights Redditor is predicting a man-geddon for working class men, or men in general, if Hillary is elected.
“Honestly I dont think much would change,” wrote Leinadro.
They would continue toiling away as the unsung backbone of the economy while being told they are entitled misogynists for having an opinion.
But there is one chance.
Bring up the plights of men to Clinton directly, openly, and frequently.
If feminism is about “equality for all people” then it shoulnt take much effort to at least have the greivances of men to be heard right? Sure change wont be instant but speaking up shouldnt be too hard right?
But Mens-Advocate — we met him earlier — had a ready response to this heretical view.
“I presume you think lynch victims should just have appealed to the Klan’s ‘better side’?” he asked sarcastically.
There should really be some sort of updated Godwin’s Law to invoke every time some MRA dude compares men to slaves or victims of the Klan.
Sometimes I wonder if we need to have a total and complete shutdown of white men voting until we can figure out what is going on.
NOTE TO LITERAL-MINDED MRAS: That last bit there contained
