One such mangina is Sam Diener, editor of Peacework Magazine. He asks us to stop male violence. Let's see:
On Femicide: End Men's Violence
How many massacres perpetrated by men against women will it take before we as a society, especially those of us who are men, work seriously to end men's violence?
To this we evidently answer:
Stop the institutionalized feminist violence against men, and they will cease to be angry. Stop stealing their house, their money, their children, stealing their jobs, their future, stop destroying their families and putting them in prison with false accusations and drive them to suicide and maybe, yes MAYBE, they will forgive you and stop. The load of injustice done to men has reached a critical mass, enough to set a giant explosion that will destroy the world. It is only justice that men should be entitled to a revenge somehow, the only problem is that the total wrong done to them is of such magnitude that not even the destruction of the entire planet would be enough to atone for it. So, the few massacres perpetrated until now are but a few drops of water in the ocean. Much more are needed, yes you heard me right, much more such violence is needed if we want to only begin to address the problem and the vast injustice done to men, and satisfy the powerful thirst for revenge of the world's male collective.
Such sad occurences are not hate crimes at all, they are merely oulets for unbalanced individuals, prisoners of a world of injustice. As long as generalized injustice prevails, some might be tempted by such violence. Feminists should understand that only in giving up undue privileges and stopping the present assault on fathers and masculinity, could they prevent the coming of a Spartacus revolt: a revolt of the slaves. Real Men do not accept to be reduced to second rate citizens, they do not accept to have everything taken away from them and sit quietly, as modern society continues to destroy them and their families. They will not disappear silently into the night, that is the message of such acts of violence. They will take the lives of as many of their enemies as they can before they die. You say you don't like that? You should have thought about it before you started this war. In war there are casualties as you know, and if one side is ready to die in producing a maximum amount of damage, the other side has to live with it. YOU have to live with it. The only mistake of feminism is: THEY STARTED THIS WAR, now they have to pay the consequences.
LA Fitness Massacre, August 2009
And now a feminist, Louise Roth, about the LA Fitness Massacre in early August 2009.
She says she was a university student living in Montreal during the Montreal Massacre on December 6, 1989. She says Marc Lepine separated the men from the women and claimed he was “fighting feminism, that he was specifically targeting women, and killed 14. She insists that saying that he was “crazy” and “psychotic” or to blame his mother does not help at all and only masks the truth. She asks us to recognize that the Montreal Massacre was an anti-feminist attack and an extreme form of violence against women.
Now that is obvious. Feminism creating problems for over 50 years now, and one young man becomes unhappy, refuses to accept things as they are and decides to protest violently. All this is perfectly understandable. She continues in saying that Lepine blamed women for taking the education and the jobs he felt entitled to have as a man. Now what was he supposed to do? Accept the situation? He chose not to, and what shocks these feminists out of their wits is that some might approve of that. Of course we approve! If feminists say one thing, we will certainly not automatically approve. And what if we say NO? What Marc lepine really did, was merely to draw a line in the sand and say ENOUGH. What enrages feminists is that Marc said NO, a little bit emphatically I'll admit (with a collateral damage of 14), but his main sin remains to have said NO to feminists. They damned him for it!
Roth continues in pointing out that in his suicide letter, Lepine said that feminists had always ruined his life and that he planned to send them “to their Maker”. He was enraged because women were taking away men’s traditional advantages in education and in the workforce, without relinquishing women’s traditional advantages. What she fails to mention is that anyone seeing someone else taking away his traditional advantages in education and the workforce without relinquishing her traditional advantages, anyone seeing that would become angry, quite understandably. So, Lepine became mad, QUITE UNDERSTANDABLY, as anyone else would. So, his reaction is NORMAL. Therefore, targeting such a group as his enemies (whoever they might be) could still be seen as ''normal''.
I know there is the moral issue here that killing is wrong, and the Christian belief that one should forgive, but when one feels his very future threatened, then: to hell with forgiveness! Historically, christianity has never lived up to its high principles of forgiveness and turning the other cheek; so why do you expect a young man to do it? We do not deny that this was an antifeminist attack as Roth is so prone to remind us, but when she speaks of the wider issues of violence against women, she should not forget that feminism is a violent and hate filled movement making war on men for over a century now, and which aim is not to take its fair share but to take away everything. The very survival of men hangs in the balance. Fighting this war has become a necessity, and maybe Marc's gesture was really only one of survival.