Tuesday, September 1, 2009


The feminist doctor just delivered a baby boy and handed it to the mother, saying: “Congratulations! It’s a murderer.” Let us look at the litany of the “boys and their toys” accusations making all men potential murderers and the one of feminist peaceniks who portray women as natural born nurturers. How come that, worldwide, 75 percent of children under age 6 are killed by women? And above all, how come that child-killing women are ''hands-on killers'': women are more likely than men to use their hands and feet as weapons to kill children (54 percent versus 22 percent)? Doesn't it mean a more serious intent, more rage and more hate? Nurturing? Think again!

Young, unmarried females are more likely to commit infanticide by suffocation or strangulation, whereas older married females beat them to death. What does this suggest? Younger women are more compassionate in their killing and older women more full of rage? Anyhow, “the shame is that most men, from the beginning of time, have remained and continue to remain silent, turning a blind eye, accepting this female cruelty, rarely speaking out against such monstrous behaviour”: making up excuses. The unescapable fact is that the dominant killers of children are women. And let us not forget that children are the most vulnerable and innocent of victims.


Malevolence exists in equal proportions in both genders, it manifests itself in an unlimited number of ways. For those who believe in equality, some might say that the Montreal mass killer "Marc Lepine" was not a typical Quebecois, that he was culturally conditioned by his Moslem upbringing to misogynist malevolence, and that it was that which he unleashed at L'école Polytechnique. But to say that it was not normative North American male values which spawned his hatred of women does not help, and neither does to emphasize that he did not come from a typical Canadian family. Then his revolt was just, and his grievances were real: so real that most masculists still identify with them today.

It may be true that Canadian men have been unjustly scapegoated for the actions of whom we call ''this madman'', but deep down, even those bigot enough or racist enough to take exception at his upbringing, family culture or ethnic background, even they must admit that ''much of his revolt was just''. Right wingers of any provenance have at least one thing in common with him, that is: ''they don't like feminists''. Saying that the Montreal massacre cannot be blamed on normal north American male values is the lame excuse behind which bigots hide, saying that the tradition of responsible civilian firearms ownership has been tainted by the gesture is the lame excuse of gun nuts and NRA enthousiasts, the fact is that Lepine's revolt is bigger than any of us.

Hell, why do you think police officers (especially those who suffered a nasty divorce) and other authority figures secretly understand his reasons? True, they would never side with him openly, not yet anyway... , but still. Don't say that these pertinent realities were unknown to you, and don't ever say that it sends a chill up your spine, then you know that secretly many of you approve of the killer. It is just that you cannot say it yet: peer pressure, your family, your wife, the women you know, society at large. But what will you do the day even women will start to like him and understand his reasons?

No comments:

Post a Comment