The author of the article identified after these comments quotes “rugby league legend Mal Meninga” as having stated that Australia has “become a nation of pansies.” She agrees and provides observations and statistics that prove her right. She is right, but the problem is not just Australian, the escalating feminization of men affects the people of all developed nations — well, perhaps primarily the North-American ones, the European ones, India, China, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong and many more.
That calamity is almost but not yet entirely global. It is odd that with all of the sleuthing Elizabeth Farrelly had to do to produce her article, she did not mention the end (if not the final solution) that the large-scale feminization of men will lead to. Perhaps she did not consider that issue because her interest is in men and not in the role of men in the nature of things.
In all of those feminized nations, increasingly in ever larger numbers of developing and under-developed nations, populations are dying out and and fading away. Deeply religious nations and population sectors don’t have that problem of dying out, and it matters not a bit whether they are Christian or adhere to any other religion not so much admired by the feminized West.
The problem of depopulation may in part be due to something that Elizabeth Farrelly speculates on in her article. It may be the consequence of – amongst other candidate causes – decreasing sperm counts and decreasing motility of sperm, often causing outright infertility. It seems to be more likely due to a number of factors that Elizabeth Farrelly did not address. One of those is population “control”, more accurately, a UN-endorsed and -promoted program for reducing the world population down to between 300 million to one billion people.
Depopulation policies spark not only hatred of families with children and of the men within and without those families who fathered those children, they also produce all of the symptoms of the feminization of men that Elizabeth Farrelly described in her article.
If men can’t have families and be the heads of their families, the teachers, leaders and role models for their children, some of them will at the very least be likely to want to be more like women and to attempt to take their share of the material and emotional advantages that can be had through doing that. As Elizabeth Farrelly properly implies, in the end it will all come down to the reality that men, unable to gain the respect and appreciation given to women on account of women’s ability to give birth, will simply turn, if not into parasites, at most into sad and dysfunctional imitations of women — in behaviour and in appearance.
That is not all that will happen. Those who will not learn from history will be condemned to have to repeat it. The increasing sterility and feminization of the Roman nobility were one of the major causes of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. The Roman Caesars themselves pointed out at the time that for its survival the Roman Empire had to rely on the virility of immigrating Barbarians. Don’t worry, it was all perfectly legal.
The Roman Empire bestowed Roman citizenship on those Barbarians. However, even that didn’t help, and eventually the Roman Empire failed to assimilate those Barbarians. Instead, the Roman Empire became consumed by more of those virile Barbarians from beyond its borders and it vanished, all along failing to resist its feminization. It was destroyed, bit by bit, by would-be conquering nations, by revolts and by uprisings, quite literally on account of a culture of death, corruption and excessive and increasingly-oppressive taxation.
By the way, although all of the Roman Empire, including most of the Middle East and all of Egypt became Christian, all of the Middle East, all of Egypt and much of the area around the rest of the Mediterranean became Muslim during and after the Roman Empire’s fall.
Almost a thousand years of a dark age followed, before western civilization once more came close to the former greatness of Rome but did not quite reach it. That may be a good thing for us. We won’t have quite so far to fall.
Women should deservedly be proud for being the bearers of life and for the taming of the lives they bear and help raise. The civilizing of those lives and the creation of the comforts of the conditions in which those lives evolve and exist came about through the efforts of men. Those efforts are risky, dangerous, even deadly for men. Still, just as feminization and loss of virility caused the fall of the Roman Empire, so the escalating feminization and loss of virility of our civilization will be the cause of its death.
That death will not be painless. One cannot help but feel sorry for today’s women (not so much for those ludicrous and deluded feminized men). Women will survive the longest. They will therefore bear the brunt of the pain of surviving the longest. That will be on account of their life expectancies that are on average in most developed nations six to seven years greater than those of men. More than two-thirds of the elderly survivors during the ongoing decline of our civilization will be women. It is tough being a woman and to be without men.
Look around you and at the tools and facilities of all sort you use. From running water to heating or cooling your home, to the roads you drive on and the airplanes you ride in, to the medications that cure your diseases, to the radio and television, newspapers and magazines that keep you informed and entertained, even the food you eat – everything and anything that did not grow naturally or by the grace of God – was invented, designed and mostly even built and produced by men. The credit for the mining and refining of the materials for the production of the consumer goods that we enjoy and the explorations required for finding the materials necessary to produce them is entirely due to the efforts of men.
It has not yet emerged that feminized men will live as long as women do. It is not likely that they ever will. About 19 out of every 20 job fatalities involve male victims. Even if only feminized men are left in the end, they will then still have to do all of the dirty, sweaty and dangerous jobs. Feminist men and women will see to that. Yes, you read that right, feminist men.
There are more male than female feminists. The vast majority of women doesn’t want to be turned into feminists. Woman who were to become honest feminists would lose too many of their present advantages by being made fully equal to men. They would have to work like men and die like men, on average six to seven years sooner (up to 14 years sooner in the countries of the former USSR) and five years sooner in the whole world than they have come to expect.
Given that a major advantage of being treated like a woman is that a man could add ten or more percent to his life span, it is not entirely unreasonable that some men want to be more like women, even if that turns many a stomach more than a bit. Survival of the fittest does not necessarily mean to be stronger. It could just as easily mean to be more like a woman. Trying to be a hero or a knight in shining armor tends to be risky and even deadly, but I am diverging from the theme of the article in The Age. (For anyone interested in the subject of the cycle of the rise and fall of civilizations throughout the history of mankind, there is an excellent essay on that: Fertilità e progresso-Fertility and progress, by Prof. Angelo Bertolo; © 2007, Campanotto – in Italian and in English.)
The Age (Melbourne)
31 May 2008
Where have all the real men gone?
By Elizabeth Farrelly
In the ancient Phrygian cult of Cybele Mater Magna, earth goddess, young male devotees would fall into a frenzy, grab a sword and, in a dramatic public gesture, emasculate themselves. Some versions have the fresh castrati run through the streets, choosing the family whose honour it will be to support them by tossing their severed gonads onto the doorstep.
But what is generally agreed, from Ovid to Lucretius to Catullus to Pausanias, is that the now genderless youths, known as galli (or, in Greek, galloi), lived and dressed thereafter as women, becoming Cybele’s priestesses, presiding at her worship and at ritual orgies in her honour.
This story might have nothing more than shock value, except for the obvious and unexplained feminisation of contemporary men. Fifty years ago, an essay on men and maleness might have been a slim volume indeed – monosyllabic maybe, something like “ugh”. Now, as rugby league legend Mal Meninga noted with disgust after his recent bloke survey: “The nation’s iconic hard Aussie blokes are a dying breed — we’ve become a nation of pansies.”….(Full Story)
Note: The typical feminist belittling done by Elizabeth Farrelly of literary tributes by and to men betrays an even more typical feminist ignorance of the respect that society once had for men and even more so with regard to the literary giants produced by mankind. All of those literary giants were without exception men. Beginning with Homer, Aristotle and Plato, there was a long succession of men that worked as philosophers, poets and scientists who time and again examined everything and anything relating to man’s existence and devised a steady stream of improvements of the human condition. That still is being done by men today, even though feminists began some decades ago their increasingly successful and counter-productive program for the deconstruction of families and civilization.
From the design and construction of the great Gothic cathedrals to the creation of masterpieces of culinary art, far more was used and necessary than the monsyllabic vocabulary Elizabeth Farrelly speculates was customary fifty years ago. Without a doubt, every one of the wonders and masterpieces of artistic expressions throughout the history of mankind was virtually without exception the work of men. That is still true today, Ms Farrelly, and that demands “testes, cojones.”