Men's Rights, Feminism And The Future Of Humanity

This will be the first and last time I will write an article that goes beyond gender issues. Sometimes in order to fully appreciate a subject such as the human rights of men and boys, it is good to step away from it at least once and look at how it fits into the grander scheme of things. There is a method to my madness, so please persevere and read until the end. The purpose of this article, is to completely shatter all forms of ideological thinking and draw people’s attention to the reality of human existence and the situation that faces us. I have been progressively working up to this point by chipping away at the narrow worldview of Feminist gender ideologues and cults like Female Supremacy and Femitheism. In this article I will be taking a sledgehammer to such thinking. If this does not wake people up from their indoctrination then I don't know what will. The time for ideological idiocy has expired. It is now time to evolve.

Humans like any species, require a habitat to survive and that habitat has a carrying capacity. Only a certain number of organisms can be sustained for a given area of habitat. If a population of any given species overshoots the carrying capacity of it’s habitat, it dies out. There are no exceptions. This does not necessarily mean extinction (although sometimes it does), there might simply be a natural culling of the community and a collapse of their ecosystem. This simple ecological model has been witnessed across the planet for billions of years. Up until fairly recently, the human race has understood its connection and reliance on the natural environment for subsistence and survival. From the Aborigines in my own country of Australia, to the Indians of North America, this relationship has been known, respected and even worshipped.

It was only after the last ice age ended 20,000 years ago and humans started to cultivate the land rather than hunt and gather, that we started to run into problems. When we settled down in one place and started farming, we began developing civilisation and since then we have become more and more detached from our dependence on our natural environment to exist. We shifted our perspective from being part of the natural world, to owning the land. People may look around now and consider that with modern technology we are masters of our environment. The last time I checked food did not originate at a supermarket, electricity required mostly fossil fuels or uranium mined from the ground and our building and goods required minerals that had to come from the Earth. No, our civilisation is still entirely dependent on the Earth to continue its existence, especially with the 7 billion of us living and consuming like never before in human history.

Our modern civilisation is built on an infinite growth model while we live on a finite planet. To believe that we can continue to run society as we are is not just delusional, it is insane. We are wilfully setting ourselves up for extinction. People call that alarmist and they might even mention “conspiracy theory” et cetera. You don’t need to believe in some hidden agenda to put two and two together. All people have to do is just look at what is on the surface and review the facts at hand. They speak for themselves. If you have a finite system, then sooner or later infinite growth will bring about a collapse. It is simple maths and commonsense really. So let’s look at a few areas where such a situation is unfolding before our eyes. There are several of them- Overpopulation, peak oil and the energy crisis, runaway climate change, a global debt crisis and a food and water crisis.

Underlying all of these major challenges is a trend that many people seem to have difficulty understanding. This trend in the physical sciences is called non-linearity. Humans seem to be able to easily conceptualise and understand progressive linear growth. We can all extrapolate growth into the future, provided the amount of growth is constant. It is when the amount of growth is non-constant that we have great difficulty. This applies to individual’s right through to governments. Compound interest on debt and the geometric growth of bacteria provide classic examples of non-linearity. This poses major problems for how we run and manage society, because we often fail to account for non-linearity.

A second underlying factor to these problem’s, is that their impact is often separated from the public by time and distance. Many of the actions we make today as a society, generate consequences that will be felt years or even decades from now. One example is the boy crisis in education and another was the housing bubble and GFC in the US in the late 2000s which was set in motion much earlier. In addition to this, many of our actions as a society have impacts that are felt at least initially in distant places. Climate change for instance is having a huge impact in polar region’s and this will eventually impact lower latitudes as things progress. The impact on polar region’s when it is felt in local regions is very indirect, such as changes to the icecaps altering the jet stream and causing huge fires. It is not easy to see such a connection unless it is pointed out, because most of us don’t live in polar latitudes, witness the damage and see the flow-on effect to the rest of the world. A similar situation exists with the epidemic of poverty, starvation and disease in the third world. If it is out of sight, then it is out of mind and the mainstream media encourages this lack of awareness further.

Technology also distances us from the consequences of an unsustainable society. When prices for food rise at the supermarket, little is known by most about the drought behind it and the role of climate change in enhancing the frequency of such droughts. Another example is peak oil and the impact that has down the line for the world’s economies. If global oil production peaks and then follows an irreversible decline, petrol prices go up, transport of food becomes more expensive and prices rise at supermarkets. The list of consequences of course goes on. When action and consequence are separated by time and distance, then it is very difficult for people especially at a societal level, to see the connection and enact social change. It all comes down to motivation and the sense of urgency we feel. Various forms of addiction and smoking all share a large time delay between action and consequence. This is a major flaw in human psychology and a huge weakness of our societies when it comes to dealing with social, economic and environmental problems.

A third and final underlying factor to our major global problems, has to do with human perception and our collective failure to grasp and understand the concept of systems. A large part of human intellect relies on categorising, ordering and putting things into boxes or classification schemes. Or put another way, going through the process of distinguishing things from each other and deriving meaning from the resulting schema. Marketing and every ideological movement relies on this simple aspect of human psychology. When people talk of “us” and “them”, or when we see racism, sexism and so forth in society, this is the neurological process at play. The same process that allows us to order society, human labour and make decisions (from simple accounting, through to government policy), is a virtue and a vice. In relation to feminism we can see this play out very easily. Patriarchy theory is a central tenant of modern mainstream “gender” feminism. Through this paradigm everything is ordered around the premise of male privilege, female oppression and Marxist class conflict between the genders. The problem with ordering information to fit a worldview, is that it completely ignores the reality that society and the universe itself operates as a massive system.

Relationships between components of the social and natural systems are ignored and are often not even identified. Why? Because the brains of ideologues have been conditioned to see the world through a narrow lens and to reject concepts that don’t fit their paradigm. Positive and negative feedbacks and the nature of the systems themselves go completely unnoticed. This is extremely dangerous, because people essentially become delusional. A key aspect of rational thought, is to build a paradigm from information, rather than fit information to an existing paradigm. One way of thinking involves logical thought and the other involves dogmatic thought. If one applies such thinking at an influential level within society as feminism does, then that can have huge consequences. Sadly most of the people in the media, in government, at high levels of business and especially in politics are highly ideological (of one sort or another). So we essentially have a society run by idiots or people that wilfully reject facts. Indeed Prof. Noam Chomsky has said much the same as I have and is certainly not the only one that can see the writing on the wall. We have all sorts of ideologues of course. Feminists, the extreme left, the extreme right, religious fanatics et cetera. A large portion of the public are not ideological, or committed to a worldview to the point where facts or other perspectives are summarily dismissed without critical examination (of course some people are). Unfortunately the same cannot be said of our leaders and they are the people making the decisions which will determine the future of the entire human race.

When all of the three factors I have mentioned are combined, then you get a very dangerous and destructive form of synergy. The non-linearity of these problems and the lag and distance between action and consequence, allow the ideologues in power to easily manipulate the public perception of serious issues. It is easy to dismiss problems when their consequences are non-indirect, gradual at first and delayed. Apathy sets in and people go into a haze. That is doubly so when people have a vested interest in the status quo as many of us do. Of course ideological thinking ensures only true believers reach the highest positions of authority. So those that question established thought have little hope of acquiring power and instigating social change until a collapse is imminent and the public finally demand it. These realities effectively deadlock political and societal action to address key issues. The insidious aspect to all of it, is that non-linear growth encourages this to happen. Consequences are gradual at first, so it is easy to downplay an issue when we really should be taking action. Then once we are over a critical tipping point, the problem begins to quickly magnify at an ever increasing rate. We then suddenly wake up as a society, but it is too late now, the problem is growing so fast we cannot adapt to it in time. The opportunity to prepare was lost, because we thought that the closure of the window for preparation would follow a linear trend, not a geometric one.

If we do not address overpopulation, peak oil, runaway climate change, the global debt crisis and looming food and water scarcity, then civilisation will collapse. All one needs to consider is the maths. We have population going up, resources going down and an environment that is predicted to be markedly more hostile to life and economic activity in the near future than at present. Of all the problems our species faces, runaway climate change presents as the greatest threat and nuclear weapons are a close second. In the Arctic and under the Siberian tundra, are enormous quantities of methane (literally billions of tonnes). Methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. As we release more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere from industrial activity, we raise temperatures in the polar regions especially and this triggers the release of methane. The methane in turn warms the planet up even more, triggering the release of more methane and this becomes a self-reinforcing positive feedback loop. This is merely just one positive feedback loop and once we go past their tipping points, none of them can be stopped. An analogy that is often given, is to consider a ball rolling down a hill. After the ball is nudged past a tipping point, it will roll down the hill by itself. Due to the fact that positive feedbacks are self-reinforcing, the rate of climate change can switch from a relatively steady linear rate that we can adapt to, to one with an almost exponential rate once we are beyond the tipping points. As soon as we travel past the tipping points, we become committed to a planet undergoing runaway climate change.

Forget collapsing civilisation, runaway climate change has the potential to trigger a mass extinction event. Methane releases have been triggered in the distant past due to geological activity (as opposed to anthropogenic causes) and have been linked to several of the biggest planetary extinction events we know of. The sobering reality is that sooner or later humans will face extinction from runaway climate change if we continue to do nothing. We are already seeing bubbling methane plumes kilometres across in the arctic ocean. If the planet warms to greater than 4 degrees (celsius) above the historic baseline global mean temperature then the following is a significant possibility: we cannot grow our food on arable land, most of the plant and animal species will die and we will destroy the base of the marine food chain (phytoplankton) and with it most marine life. We will lose our food supply and we will have widespread mass starvation (I am not even mentioning water scarcity from drought). Without a viable habitat, industrial collapse is a certainty in the short term and human extinction is highly probable in the long term.

Of concern to me, is that there is an argument to be made that we have already triggered enough positive feedbacks to ensure our own extinction and most of the life on this planet. If this is indeed the case, then with the exception of extremophiles and microbial life, very few of the species of today will exist in 10 million or so years when the Earth becomes habitable again. Now if all of that seems unbelievable, please watch the adjacent lecture above from Professor Emeritus Guy McPherson. This is not doomsday talk, this is scientific research and this is what the more recent findings are indicating. Remember the climate is a non-linear system, things can change far more rapidly than we are generally used to observing.

There is only one thing we have to rely on that could avert the collapse of civilisation and the extinction of the entire human race and that is our intellect. The very trait that got our species into this mess in the first place, might get us out of it. We created the technology to destroy ourselves, but also the means to elevate humans to the next stage of evolution. Despite what Prof. McPherson has concluded, I don’t believe human extinction is a certainty at this point, although it is significantly probable given projections. But I definitely believe that if we continue with business as usual over the course of this century it will be. So what can we do? We need to make full use of our intellect and direct it with rational thinking and facts instead of ideological thought, wishful thinking and wilful ignorance.

So now I want to contrast these rather daunting global challenges with the relevance of ideological mainstream feminism. In many ways modern feminism represents the height of human stupidity. Whilst Rome burns and our economies and global civilisation slowly falls apart, we have idiots writing books and conducting talks in the mainstream media about, “The End of Men” and writing about whether men are “necessary”. We have a feminist ideology that views any discussion of the serious issues affecting the other half of the population as an attack on women and it even has radicals talking about the extermination of men. Clearly nothing has been learned from the extermination of 6 million Jews. While we face peak oil, runaway climate change, a global resource crisis, social collapse and even human extinction, idiots are promoting their twisted views on Female Supremacy, discussing how men can be subjugated better and promoting the Femitheist doctrine of male population reduction and castration. This is how stupid human beings are. If we are going to survive as a species and retain civilisation, then this type of stupidity must stop. Ideological thinking of all kinds has now become a direct threat to the continued existence of the human race and 90% or more of the biosphere. If the threat of human extinction does not shake these idiots out of their ideological mindset, then nothing will. Surely self-preservation is something that matters to them. Or does it? Judging from some of their writings, there is no doubt in my mind that some of these people are insane.

We are literally undermining our capacity to adapt as a species to the huge challenges we face, by ignoring the boy crisis in education and failing to make full use of the potential of the male half of the population. We need as many men and women educated (both genders, not just one) as possible to create the technical solutions to solve these huge problems. Why are we hindering the potential of the male half of the population when civilisation may face collapse and there is a real chance of human extinction? We need a fully functional society and that means restoring the family unit. When we remove fathers from children’s lives, set up a system to exploit divorced fathers and husbands and marginalise men and boys under the law and in our institutions, then we create substantial social and economic problems (less social cohesion, far more crime, poverty, suicide and mental illness for example) that undercut our ability to focus our energy collectively as a society on the real challenges facing the human race. Celebrating the demise of men as Hanna Rosin and Maureen Dowd have recently been doing is quite insane. Especially when you consider what our species is up against and that we may face the end of civilisation and extinction. It is like celebrating becoming paralysed from the waist down before you have to run in the Olympics. In the light of our huge global challenges, continuing to ignore men's issues will partly contribute to social collapse and human extinction in the long term. Therefore taking men's rights issues seriously, is now an important matter for the survival of society and humanity.

I agree with feminists that our current societal system is in the way of human progress, but I don’t believe it has anything to do with a patriarchy. This system does not serve men any more than it does women. The truly privileged are not everyday men, they are the ultra-rich (elite men and women) and the true oppressors are not men, they are our multinational corporations. Are only they to blame for this mess? No. We have all wilfully participated in keeping a social system going that benefits the few at the expense of the many for far too long. We are guilty just like the elite. Every time we wilfully ignore the unsustainable nature of civilisation, we are complicit in keeping our politicians and business leaders trained on other matters. Accountability works both ways and there is plenty of blame to be shared. We don’t live in a patriarchy, this society is run by a corporate oligarchy and before that it was run by the aristocracy. As we saw with the bank bailouts in the US from the GFC, it is socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor.

I would think that all of this would now be common knowledge to most people, but apparently not to feminist ideologues, whom still erroneously believe who runs society has more to do with gender rather than wealth. Masculinity is not the root of all evil, the love of money is. Perhaps one of the most amusing aspects of our social system, is the belief by the powerful that if you divide society against itself you can rule it. The corporate hand behind mainstream “gender” feminism and the state, has not gone unrecognised by the men’s human rights movement, humanists or other activists in human rights. The support of Hanna Rosin and Maureen Dowd by the mainstream media and the companies that own them, has not escaped our attention either.

The game is obvious and the intent is as clear as day. Turn the masses against each other, destroy the family unit, deflect peoples attention away from who is really pulling the strings and drain people of the economic and social power to challenge abuse of authority and influence. Two things are not going to work for them though. Firstly, it is hard for men and women to turn on each other as it goes against our neurobiology. Men and women have a tendency to love each other and pair bond. More and more people of both genders are speaking out against the hate mongering (including former feminists) which is being promoted under the false guise of state sanctioned feminist equality. Secondly when you attempt to divide society against itself, then over the long term that tends to destablise society and the power structures that depend on it.

The world is going to have to put cooperation before competition to tackle our global problems. This was how our tribal hunter-gatherer communities used to operate before so-called civilisation. All of our self-interests are interconnected in some way and we live in an interdependent social system. We are going to have to harness talent, rather than stifle it with misandry, misogyny, racism and other bigotry et cetera. Everyone of us is a human being after all and we all have the same basic needs for survival. In the end there are no men's rights or women's rights, just human rights. So the human race should unite under our common humanity, if we are serious about having a future as a species on this planet. We must prioritise solving our global challenges and direct our energies and resources toward realistic plans of action. I don’t have all the answers, but it seems pretty obvious to me that it is extremely foolish for our society to marginalise the male half of the population when we are faced with these huge global problems. Why handicap ourselves when civilisation and the survival of humanity is at stake? The stupidity in celebrating "The End of Men" in light of what we are facing as a species, beggars belief. We need men and not just women, being given the opportunity to reach their full potential and contributing to society and we need that right now! Frankly in my view, our technology has now effectively made our archaic social, legal, political and economic systems based on pre-21st century thinking redundant and actually maladaptive to human needs. As technology evolves, we must evolve with it or we will regress back to a more primitive existence.

Another aspect to consider, is that our current societal system relies on structural violence (the biggest killer in human history) to maintain the social stratification it inherently reinforces. Feminism is merely just one manifestation of that structural violence. This socioeconomic system is consequently enormously wasteful and destructive. Consider the multibillion dollar divorce industry and child support bureaucracy for instance and the social and economic cost and even the environmental burden that places on the planet. Consider the change in living arrangements after a marital and family breakdown and the psychological impact the process has on children and the men whom are exploited by the divorce/family court system (watch this video and this video for examples). People live in two dwellings as opposed to one, there is more demand for power and more consumption and there is a rise in social problems, such as suicide, criminal activity and drug addiction et cetera. All of this waste and social damage is avoidable, but there is a strong financial incentive for vested interests, particularly various government agencies, to keep making money off other peoples misery (mainly men and children) and perpetuating the twisted family court and divorce process.

Due to the enormous waste and social damage our current socioeconomic system inherently generates and the enormous scale of the problems facing humanity, I believe what is required is a radical overhaul of our current societal system. We need to establish a resource based or natural law economy to preserve modern civilisation. Please see the adjacent video lecture for a description on what a resource based economy is. There is also a valuable snippet on gender and human rights advocacy in the presentation. I don’t think our existing economic system will support such a transition. There is simply too much power to be lost by those that run our current system. I think a new social model will have to emerge from the grassroots of society, much like how the men’s human rights movement began. I believe the rather radical proposals put forward by the Zeitgeist movement are now our best option to avoid social collapse and extinction. People can be inclined to disagree with me of course and no one can say they have all the answers or even the right answer as yet. I thus remain open of course to other solutions. Honestly though, from looking at the shear scale of the problems we are facing and the short time frame we have to turn things around, I think only radical and fundamental transformation of civilisation will be successful in averting disaster. Social and economic reform simply won’t be good enough this time around.

The choice is ours. Either humans will reluctantly take the next step in our evolution, let go of archaic social structures and ideological thinking and master technological change, or we will become extinct as millions of other species have done in the geological past. If we do become extinct, then we will leave some haunting reminders for any extraterrestrial life that stumbles upon our solar system and stellar neighbourhood. The Voyager and Pioneer spacecraft both have the story of humanity attached to their structures (The Pioneer Plaques and Voyager Golden Records). If such beings travel to our planet, perhaps they will visit our landings on the Moon and find relics of our brief existence in space. I imagine that upon surveying our Venus-like world a million or more years from now, they will wonder how a species that sent craft out of the solar system, could not even work together between the sexes to transition from a stage 0 civilisation to a stage 1. The answer in my humble opinion, is that ideological thinking such as feminism and the social structures that support it, holds the advancement of humanity back. When we don’t question ideas or become close-minded, then we become slaves to our ideas and the people that create them. An open, inquisitive and yet critical mindset, is what humanity needs to be cultivating right now. We don’t need more ideologues, we need more scientifically literate people. Being a former molecular biologist I am admittedly a little biased, but what I am saying is still true!

Going back into the dark ages from the age of reason, is a not a step forward for the human race.